The mood in the country is heated. It is not only on the political stage that party representatives are turning against each other. Some politicians are no longer safe on the streets either. What is going on? What can be done about it? Caren Miosga asks two people who know about it.
The list of those who are politically active and experience violence for it is getting longer and longer these days. Most recently, it was CDU member of the Bundestag Roderich Kiesewetter, who was first verbally and then physically attacked at an election campaign stand. In Germany, scenes have played out in recent weeks and months that reflect a worrying trend: attacks against public officials and elected representatives are increasing. In 2023, the Federal Criminal Police Office recorded an increase of 29 percent compared to the previous year – to around 5,400 crimes.
“Incitement, crises, upheavals – can politics still bring people together?”, this is the question posed by Caren Miosga on Sunday evening. The topic is being discussed by two people who, on the one hand, know how to work politically. And, on the other hand, have already had their own experiences of what it is like to be criticized or even attacked for it: Ricarda Lang, the co-chair of the Greens, and Armin Laschet, former Prime Minister of North Rhine-Westphalia and, as a failed candidate for chancellor, now a simple CDU member of the Bundestag.
So where does the politically motivated violence come from, Miosga wants to know. “What we are seeing is a form of disinhibition,” says Lang. The phenomenon of (verbal) attacks is nothing new. But now the violence is directed against the way democracy works: against free elections, free expression of opinion and the promotion of this very opinion. Voluntary local politicians in particular should not have to be afraid of putting up election posters.
The experienced politician Laschet cannot give a definitive explanation for how this could have happened. “I believe that the polarization that exists in society comes, of course, partly through social media.” There, language is less inhibited. “Years ago, people wrote nasty letters to the editor, now they attack any person anonymously online. There is a certain lack of inhibition.” It all began with the coronavirus pandemic. There was no longer any need for consideration, but those who rejected measures were immediately pushed into a corner.
“Those people up there are crazy”
The 63-year-old analyses in general terms: “What makes the debates so difficult is when we morally exaggerate every argument we make and put those who see things differently in a corner.” The Greens, for example, should not pretend that a heat pump will save the world’s climate. And those who are against it should not be vilified as climate change deniers. Lang will not let that go. Firstly, because in her view her party has never said this. Secondly, because nowadays you can no longer talk about prosperity and security without including climate protection.
It is also not a question of labelling politicians who reject the building energy law in question as right-wing populists or the like, explains Lang. Or those who reject the end of combustion engines. However, it is absolutely populist that the Union in Germany is stirring up sentiment against Ursula von der Leyen’s EU Commission’s decision on combustion engines (keyword: Green Deal). After all, she is the Union’s own top candidate for the European elections. This creates total uncertainty among people, who at some point have to think: “Those up there are crazy.”
In conversations with citizens, she is currently getting the feeling that politics is only about winning or losing, says Lang. But they are more concerned with what political decisions mean for them. In a government, you have to give your coalition partners points, warns Laschet. Because if the impression arises – which is rightly the case with the traffic light coalition – that the coalition is at odds, it damages the reputation of politics. Laschet believes that if the traffic light coalition were doing well, not so many people in the country would be protesting.
Lang also agrees that things could be better between the SPD, FDP and Greens. But like no other leading politician, the 30-year-old knows that it is not just her party that is the focus of criticism, but also her person. Moderator Miosga asks her about the oft-cited fact that she dropped out of university. She says that it doesn’t bother her that political opponents like CDU leader Friedrich Merz laugh at her. But when it gets personal, she doesn’t go along with it. She cites Markus Söder as an example.
Lang, Kühnert and the bitch
On Ash Wednesday, the Bavarian Prime Minister compared Lang and SPD General Secretary Kevin Kühnert to his dog. “What distinguishes my dog Molly from Kevin Kühnert and Ricarda Lang?” he asked the audience at the time. “My dog has completed training, dear friends. Training as a guard dog.”
She doesn’t want to be treated with kid gloves, Lang said on Sunday evening. After all, she doesn’t do that with Merz & Co. either. But it has to remain decent. Because nowadays, “outrage debates” quickly arise when someone makes a small mistake. And the harsher criticism is formulated on social media, the more likes and attention it gets. But these debates ignore people’s everyday lives.
The Green Party leader is also quite self-critical. The traffic light coalition has not managed to “give people enough security”. It has not been communicated that there is a plan and that they know where they are going. Arguing is fine, but compromises that have been found should not be questioned again after just three days.
Personal versus cynicism
Miosga says that she is not immune to criticism. Quite the opposite: she does not draw a clear line to protect herself, but shares a private moment with her partner on the train, for example. Even if it results in a shitstorm. The presenter wants to know: Why are you making yourself so vulnerable at this point? Ricarda Lang says: “Because you remain human in politics too.” It is important for her “not to harden yourself.” Even if that means that her mother reports on a traffic light gallows in the neighboring town, where it is quite clear that it was aimed at her daughter.
It is tempting to withdraw and only talk to those who have the same opinion. Or to take a “hard line” and become a “machine” or even a “robot” in political office. That would not be good for her and would make her politics worse, says Lang. Her hand remains outstretched, her ear open. She protects herself from cynicism.
Laschet, who first entered the Bundestag in the year Lang was born, would not do it that way, he says when asked. But he too tried to remain “as I am” in the 2021 federal election campaign. If he had only traveled through the country as a state figure, it would not have been authentic, he says. But it would probably have spared him a lot. For example, there was the widespread criticism of his appearance in the flood area, when he was photographed grinning happily while Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier spoke about the terrible disaster. That was clearly his mistake, says Laschet today.
A moment that cost him the victory? Laschet doesn’t believe it, but sees himself as the victim of “aggressive negative campaigning”. He is outraged that he was even denigrated as a “mini-Trump” and a brown coal man. “I’m not really suited to being an enemy, the way I am as a person and as a type.” Laughter breaks out in the studio.
Sideswipe at Söder
With only two participants, the show is not without its long stretches. For example, when the show spends several minutes reviewing the failed energy policy of recent years, particularly Nord Stream 2 and the dependence on Russian gas. Lang and Laschet seem rather irreconcilable, but at least it remains factual. Because that is exactly what the two believe it should be about. The show gets a little more momentum again during a relaxed question and answer session, in which Lang, among other things, advocates kebab prices of up to five euros and Laschet gets the laughs on his side when it comes to the current K question.
When asked what the new chancellor’s name is, he says: “I don’t know what his name is, but he will come from the CDU.” Friedrich Merz probably won’t be so keen to hear that. Will they both serve as ministers in the next federal government? Lang says she hasn’t planned anything yet. And Laschet replies: “I want to do my job.” The audience laughs again.
And then the failed candidate for chancellor cannot resist taking a swipe at his CSU opponent Söder. When asked about a federal president, the only thing that comes to mind is Söder’s Bavarian origins as a plus point, but he is more explicit when asked again about the K question. Miosga wants to know whether he has already spoken to Merz about how to prevent Söder from becoming chancellor? “No,” says Laschet. “He said his place is in Bavaria and we believe that.” Lang smugly remarks that it is brave to believe a comment by Markus Söder for more than a week.
Laschet appears to take it in his stride that Söder is still publicly attacking Laschet and questioning his then-contested candidacy for chancellor. An attitude that is helpful when it comes to concentrating on the factual level in political discourse. The two guests on this evening make it clear that this is currently lacking. Whether this is the solution to ending the violence is another matter. But it would at least be a first building block.