Failure to address the issue

Failure to address the issue
In the wake of the recent election disaster, the center-left parties have zeroed in on the issue of migration instead of solving the social question.

After immigration and flight were also hyped in the media to become the most important political topic and at the same time the bashing of the citizen's income with social envy was elevated to the new national pastime, the democratic parties in the federal and state governments, which had fallen into a panic, are now on a disastrous path after the latest election disaster in eastern Germany. Where this leads, was recently observed in the Austrian elections, which could serve as a warning for the next federal election in Germany in 2025. Can we solve social problems and fight right-wing extremism by fighting immigrants? It can hardly be called clever to declare migration the “mother of all political problems” in a “competition to outdo each other” without taking into account the actual motives of the electorate.

by The Trade Union Forum

[This article posted on 11/14/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/die-themaverfehlung/]


Throw out foreigners and talk to the right-wingers — and the social problems that have been unresolved for decades will be solved and the social losers pacified? Why and for what did the established parties really get the red card? Even before the election in Saxony, social security was the most important factor in the election decision, according to surveys.

The sole focus on the migration issue is a clever way of distracting attention from the social imbalance in Germany, with increasing inequality and injustice. The misguided answers of the parties fail to meet the needs of the people, who are turning to the right-wing populists in ever greater numbers in frustration.

The social question divides society more than the migration question

It is not so much the migration issue as the social issue and the issue of justice, including fair taxation, that divides our society and endangers democracy while strengthening the right-wing populists. Neither the governing parties nor the opposition parties seem to understand this, with the former now opposing the growing AfD without a plan or even adopting its slogans. In reality, the economic upheaval since the coronavirus pandemic and the consequences of the war have had a significant impact on the spread of right-wing populist ideologies, as researchers have determined. This is because the factor of work and financial circumstances in households also play a role here. One in five older people in Germany is at risk of poverty. Women are affected particularly often, but they are less susceptible to right-wing populism than middle-aged men.
Social inequality fuels right-wing populism and endangers democracy

As the Oxfam report on “World Social Justice Day” already stated at the beginning of the year, social inequality fuels right-wing populism and endangers democracy. Society and democracy are facing an ever greater test as a result of the unequal distribution of wealth and income, as discussed in yesterday's “hart aber fair” program on ARD. This does not deter the democratic centrist parties from wanting to counter the political shift to the right with narrow-minded fallacies after the disastrous state election results in eastern Germany: By jointly breaking the “political firewall to the right” on the migration issue, they themselves endanger democracy and thus also the future of our children. The increasingly neglected fight against the threatening climate change appears only as a mere side issue, although it moves the affected youth.

Persistent social injustices are politically ignored

It has only been a few weeks since the international “Day of Democracy” on September 15, which is intended to promote and defend democracy, followed by “World Children's Day” on September 20 and on October 1, the international “Day of the Older Generation”, which in Germany is affected by increasing old-age poverty in almost 20 percent of cases and has to join the ever-lengthening queues at the soup kitchens. Nevertheless, the federal government is cutting tax subsidies to the pension fund by up to ten billion euros. The financial burden lies with the contributors. And the more than two million children living in poverty and facing educational disadvantage have seen the prospect of a child benefit guarantee cut again.

The homeless and those looking for an affordable apartment in vain have been left in the lurch. The number of housing benefit recipients has doubled this year, as was announced today. And for those in need of care and low earners, no hope of improving their financial bottlenecks has been opened up even after decades.

The underfunded municipalities are in a permanent state of emergency, and commuters will have to wait decades before their mobility on rail and road is restored. Not to mention the continuing educational misery and educational poverty.

After the replacement of the traffic light government: Friedrich Merz as a savior?

That is why, according to the ARD trend survey, 84 percent are currently dissatisfied with the work of the coalition government and only 18 percent are satisfied with the work of Chancellor Scholz. However, 50 percent currently believe that a CDU/CSU-led federal government under a chancellor Friedrich Merz, who already sees himself as the winner of the election, would perform just as poorly. Only 25 percent trust the CDU to solve problems better. Neither the incumbent Chancellor Olaf Scholz nor the designated chancellor candidate and multimillionaire Friedrich Merz are trusted by the voters to solve problems and improve their living conditions and prospects.

Merz is pursuing a right-wing political course with fewer social benefits and less climate protection, as well as more work for employees. However, labor is taxed more in Germany than wealth and more than in most other OECD countries.

Reducing wage and income taxes and instead increasing the low rates of inheritance and gift tax could make work more financially attractive. Instead, with the new tax “relief package,” the rich save four times more taxes than the poor.

If the hapless coalition government is replaced in the next federal election year, a chancellor Friedrich Merz, a multimillionaire and former BlackRock supervisory board member with a climate-damaging private jet and vacation villa on Lake Starnberg, would have even less of an eye on the social losers, according to surveys most people are convinced of that. In an interview with the BILD newspaper two days ago, he suggested that people would only have to work more if they were to share in the growing prosperity. Employees could take Friedrich Merz as a role model, so to speak, by simply emulating his “hard-earned” economic success as a top earner – through countless supervisory board mandates. More cynicism, arrogance and complacency are not possible.

Where is the overdue fight against poverty, homelessness and social exclusion?

All the center parties – CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP and the Greens – were and are fully complicit in the social ills in Germany over the course of their various government participations in the last few decades at the federal and state level, and are responsible for them, so that they now fear for their power. The patience of the electorate is at an end – now the established parties are getting their comeuppance, because hardly anyone from the lost generation can trust the renewed promises of the established parties. In her penultimate government statement, CDU Chancellor Merkel lamented: “Child poverty is a disgrace for our country” – as if she were not largely responsible for it politically. The fight against poverty in our country is shameful. Poverty is thus passed down from generation to generation.

For 30 years, the same parties, in changing coalitions and constellations, have been unable or unwilling to stop the unchecked rise in poverty rates, especially child and old-age poverty, as well as homelessness and the queues at the food banks.

There are no binding targets and no time frame for this, but the problems are being ignored. They have seemed to have been unconcerned about the social imbalance in the country for decades, because they have never kept their repeated election promises on the subject of “social justice”; otherwise, the proportion of social losers would not continue to increase in the hidden distribution struggle between “top and bottom”.

If you want to fight poverty, you cannot forget social inequality and fair tax policy. In Germany, a hairdresser who earns at the poverty line has to pay a larger share of her wages for health insurance contributions than the leader of the opposition in the Bundestag. He does not pay any contribution at all to the pension fund, but in return he receives a significantly higher pension after a few years than any employee after a long working life. This is not fair, but it is a reality in the social system. That is how unjust things are in Germany.

Drastic cuts to social services in North Rhine-Westphalia as black-green election gifts?

As early as March 2024, the Council of Europe called on Germany to do more to combat poverty, homelessness and social exclusion in rich Germany. But the political reactions and consequences of the parties failed to materialize. There was no political reaction or consequence to the Council of Europe report, only an embarrassed silence on the one hand and an ever louder call for cuts and restrictions to social benefits on the other. As a result, social inequality in the country will foreseeably increase rather than decrease. Almost 15 million people in Germany already live in poverty. The parties are therefore doing the exact opposite of what is necessary. The protest voters' accusation is therefore: “They are governing against the people instead of for the people.”

In North Rhine-Westphalia, the black-green state government under Hendrik Wüst has proposed drastic cuts in the social sector in its current draft budget for 2025: less money for the fight against poverty and homelessness, halving the funds for old age and care, as well as for disabled people and their professional inclusion. Funding for charities will be cut by a third. Cuts and savings will also be made in addiction support, family counseling, support for women affected by violence, consumer protection, and prevention for children and young people, as well as for social counseling for refugees, with disastrous effects for the social infrastructure. Is this an attempt to win back the renegade voters – or is the hope pinned on the side war of migration policy?

9 governments with 5 parties in 4 different coalitions have squandered their chances

In doing so, the leading party politicians in government and opposition are seriously endangering democracy and driving voters en masse to the right-wing populists. After all, who can and should the people, who are increasingly affected by social disadvantage, vote for when their social prospects have not improved with any party or government change in the last 35 years, but on the contrary have continued to deteriorate, as also criticized by the social associations and trade unions, no matter which parties are in power?

Since around 1990, when the poverty rate began to rise steadily, nine different governments have been in power – black-yellow, red-green, black-red and the red-green-yellow “traffic light”. Their respective proclaimed “fight against poverty” remained unsuccessful in all these decades because it was half-hearted, inadequate and counterproductive, as the governments' own annual poverty reports revealed without consequence. Instead, the rich got richer every year, profiting from the ongoing redistribution from bottom to top. Even after ten years, the CumEx tax scandal has still not been dealt with, where around 36 billion euros were lost to the tax authorities through dubious banking transactions, and have not been recovered to this day. On the contrary, the “Bureaucracy Relief Act” has been introduced, which makes it more difficult for investigators to prosecute tax fraud such as CumEx. Defending bankers are even taking legal action against investigating public prosecutors and key witnesses. A topsy-turvy world of banking rule?

A mere change of government without a change of policy endangers democracy

A mere change of government without a simultaneous change of policy in the interest of the people is not proof of a functioning democracy, but only an exchange of leaders from the privileged caste of politicians who are not affected themselves. There is a lack of empathy for those affected socially and a lack of political courage to redistribute wealth from top to bottom through a fair tax policy, instead of continuing to promote the opposite distribution: That is why the wealth-poverty gap continues to grow unabated, and has been doing so for decades – with no prospect of change. The richest are still not being asked to pay their fair share of taxes to cover social costs, but rather the opposite is being practiced, with redistribution from the public sector to private pockets, even though the common good and social cohesion suffer as a result.

“Social imbalance” in the decisions of the coalition government

Recently, Frank Werneke, the head of the ver.di trade union, complained about the “social imbalance” in the “crazy decisions of the traffic light government” with “reaches into the social security and pension funds in favor of the FDP's pet projects,” such as the nonsensical “Growth Opportunities Act.” It is bad that the SPD and the Greens let the small FDP “drag them through the arena by the nose ring”. Werneke: “The whole thing is a daily celebration for the AfD.” The dissatisfaction among the population and the workforce with government policy is increasing daily.

In the coalition government, the FDP has distinguished itself above all by rigorously saying “no” to almost all of its coalition partners' social proposals – whether it's the wealth tax, inheritance tax, tax on the rich, basic child allowance, increase in citizens' income, loosening of the debt brake, supply chain law, collective bargaining law and so on.

In doing so, it has played a significant role in the population's dissatisfaction and the resulting popularity of the AfD. The promise of Chancellor Olaf Scholz in the face of rapidly rising defense spending: “We will not cut back on social spending,” proved to be a blatant lie.

The problem of the traffic light government is above all the obstructionist lobby party FDP

The FDP, as a neoliberal lobby party in the coalition government, is particularly favoring the dismantling of the welfare state and thus right-wing populism. As long as a party that is purely a lobbyist for the high earners, such as the FDP, which was not elected by 89 percent of the population and is therefore not wanted, sets the tone in the coalition government, social peace is not to be expected. The FDP was only the biggest profiteer of the 2012 federal election in that it received by far the most large donations from the economy, at 4.4 million euros – and thus became corruptible? The FDP profited on a grand scale with 33 large donations from financial service providers, capital and investment companies, real estate companies, as well as discount shops, etc. The highest individual donations came from the dubious financial entrepreneur Maschmeyer, who donated 200,000 euros, and the media manager Kofler, who donated 750,000 euros in an attempt to prevent the Greens from winning seats.

No party dares to approach billionaires – but would they rather approach social losers?

Nothing good can come of this, neither for the common good and social justice nor for democracy – unless the FDP deservedly flies out of the Bundestag again at the latest by 2025 with less than 5 percent, as in 2013. But the other parties, neither SPD nor CDU nor the Greens, will dare to limit the growth of the billionaires – as “service providers”? – through fair tax policy.

They would much rather start at the bottom with the social losers, especially the “work-shy” citizens receiving social assistance, with cuts and reductions – and thus court approval and approval from the middle class, which is also losing out, while at the same time moving closer to the AfD on migration policy. This is how right-wing populism permeates the center of society and the party landscape... Incidentally, with regard to the elections to the last Bundestag, to the EU Parliament and the West German state elections, there are 4.5 million AfD voters in the West, with a significantly higher population, compared to 1.5 million people in the East. If you look not only at the percentage figures, but also at the absolute figures, then the shift to the right is not only an East German problem, but also a West German phenomenon on an even larger scale, measured by the number of AfD voters.

“We need more direct democracy”

The Federal Agency for Civic Education states: “The Federal Republic of Germany is a party-based democracy: parties are indispensable for the democratic formation of opinion and irreplaceable for the act of voting. This does not imply a monopoly, because the parties are participants in the formation of political opinion, but not its sole supporters. Parties influence the formation of people's opinions only as one factor among others, such as the media.”

As early as July 2024, Professor Dr. Heinz-Josef Bontrup published an article entitled: “Politicians, Imperfections and Dependencies - We Need More Direct Democracy”. The majority of young people, across all walks of life, also want to have a say and be heard, as the latest Sinus Youth Study from 2024 shows. Young people in particular have turned away from the established parties and, as young voters, over 30 percent are drifting to the right, as the election analyses in East Germany have revealed. Their concern for the environment and climate is increasing, while the parties have pushed the topic to the back burner. Increasing discrimination is also a concern for young people.

Involving the people of voting age in political decision-making at an early stage, especially on social issues, would be an indispensable development of our democracy.

After all, our federal policy has rarely been as out of touch with the will of the people as it has been in recent decades. Countering the justified dissatisfaction with more constructive opportunities for participation, instead of joining the propaganda against foreigners, would be an important step against the increasing popularity of divisive right-wing populists. How about a third parliamentary chamber as a “citizens' chamber” and with further citizens' councils? In addition, there is a need for social visions of politics that go far beyond day-to-day politics and that build on the prevailing concerns about the future. Can the mortal parties offer that?

Editorial note: This article first appeared under the title “Is the migration issue displacing the social issue?” in the trade union forum.

The Trade Union Forum (Gewerkschaftsforum) is an online journal that critically examines primarily trade union issues, but also social and economic policy issues. It was founded by trade union activists in Dortmund at the end of 2013 and aims to draw attention to the interests of the powerful, to support the trade union struggle of employees and to give a voice to the unemployed and poor, whose voices have become increasingly quiet. Further information can be found at gewerkschaftsforum.de.