Epiphany meeting in Stuttgart: “Success could become a problem for the FDP”

Thursday, January 06, 2022

Epiphany in Stuttgart
“Success could become a problem for the FDP”

In the medium term, the FDP’s sole fixation on its boss Christian Lindner will not be enough, says liberalism expert Hans Vorländer in an interview with ntv.de. In terms of climate policy, the political scientist expected that there would be “increasingly visible conflicts” between the FDP and the Greens.

ntv.de: During the election campaign, the FDP strongly relied on a change of course in corona policy, but hardly anything has remained after several changes to the Infection Protection Act. Does Christian Lindner have to fear that his party will lose its radiance by participating in the traffic light?

Hans Vorländer: It always makes a difference whether a party is in the opposition or is involved in the government. Participation in the government means entering into compromises and finding a pragmatic way of solving problems with the coalition partners. This is happening in the moment.

Lindner can now imagine voting for mandatory vaccination, even if the subject is still controversial in the FDP. Are vaccination compulsory and liberalism compatible at all?

Liberalism is an ideological current that gives priority to freedom and individual rights. Nevertheless, freedom cannot be imagined without social responsibility. If the appeals to get vaccinated are not enough, a liberal paradigm could also support the mandatory vaccination, especially since we already have this for children with measles, for example. Taking into account all relevant aspects, in particular proportionality, a vaccination obligation can also be justified for a liberal party.

What liberalism does the FDP stand for today?

Since its founding, the FDP has united both economically liberal and civil rights liberal, but also social liberal currents that were anchored in the program in different ways at different times. At the moment one can certainly say that the major disputes that previously existed in the FDP are history. In essence, the FDP has oriented itself towards a pragmatic liberalism in which there are references to civil rights and constitutional liberalism, in which, however, the market economy orientation is strongly anchored. Traces of social liberalism can be found, for example, in questions of social advancement, which also played a certain role in the election platform before the federal election.

Would you say that the social liberal traces were a major reason why the FDP was elected in the federal election?

Major programmatic orientations seldom play a decisive role in elections, because it depends more on the specific people, the unique selling points and the function of a party. Firstly, the FDP benefited from the weakness of the CDU, secondly, it attracted young voters, thirdly, it was successful with its moderately critical course in the corona pandemic and was ultimately also elected because Lindner could be expected to assume government responsibility this time .

The FDP could not fulfill all election promises in the coalition agreement, for example there is still the solidarity surcharge for top earners. Do you think that FDP supporters of the party will resent this?

No. Behind this is the calculation that this question will be clarified by the Federal Constitutional Court. In this respect, the FDP did not have to fight. Especially since the SPD would not have accepted it either.

With which projects and which content could the FDP recommend itself to its current supporters for re-election in 2025?

2025, that is still a long way off. Until then, the coalition will have to master a series of crises and changes. During this time, the FDP must show that it has convincing concepts and that it can implement them in concert with the SPD and the Greens. Especially when it comes to coping with and containing climate change, there is likely to be an increasing number of externally visible conflicts, especially with the Greens. At the moment, this topic is being overshadowed by the other crisis, the Corona crisis. But the transformation of the economy towards climate neutrality is the big issue. There are very different regulatory ideas among the FDP and the Greens, which are certainly still controversial.

Is the FDP’s strong focus on Lindner a problem or an indication of its success?

Success could become a problem because the FDP also reveals a clear weakness with its fixation on Lindner. It is not really possible to see where the next generation is. Above all, the FDP has a problem with women in leadership positions. In the medium term, the sole fixation on Lindner will not be enough.

In the Bundestag, the FDP MPs have moved into the middle, they will sit between the Greens and the Union in the future. Do you also see a content-related back in the middle?

The FDP has always seen itself to the right of the SPD in economic policy and always to the left of the Union in socio-cultural issues. In this respect, the current seating arrangements correspond most closely to their own political positions – although it must be added that the FDP generally sat to the right of the Union in parliaments, which can be explained historically. But there has already been a central position for the FDP in parliament, for example in Schleswig-Holstein or Rhineland-Palatinate.

You have already mentioned the weakness of the CDU – in the Netherlands the Christian Democrats have recently achieved less than 10 percent, the head of government there has been the liberal VVD since 2010. Can you imagine a similar relationship in Germany at some point?

The party system is currently undergoing major changes as traditional ties are waning. Surprises are therefore always possible, as you saw in the SPD in the Bundestag election. But that the weak phase of the CDU could turn into a majority position of the FDP, which then also provides the chancellor, is rather unlikely.

Hubertus Volmer spoke to Hans Vorländer