PPoliticians, according to an old bon mot, use economists like drunkards use lanterns: They are not looking for light, but support. During his time as Federal Minister of Finance, Olaf Scholz demonstratively surrounded himself with a large number of economists. Even the position of a “visiting professor” was created to intensify the exchange between politics and science. Scholz not only consulted the relevant SPD and trade union people, who often had manageable academic merits. He brought in younger professionals with good reputations who also worked abroad. Scholz, it seemed, wanted to show what contemporary, scientifically based politics looks like.
As Chancellor, Scholz shows an unfortunate turnaround. On television, Scholz told a group of economists who were using modern methods to simulate the consequences of an energy embargo that it was “irresponsible to add up any mathematical models that then don’t work”. According to this simulation, a recession might be imminent after an energy embargo, but not the catastrophic scenario painted on the wall by the government.
Scholz cannot be accused of not aligning his policy with the results of a study, the results of which must of course be critically examined. Nor can he be accused of preferring to consult business representatives rather than academics when discussing sanctions. As chancellor, Scholz is responsible for his policies. He must decide whose advice he seeks.
However, Scholz should refrain from an outdated and, moreover, highly unsupervised anti-scientific attitude. The authors of the study are respected economists; Incidentally, several belonged to the circle created under Scholz in the Ministry of Finance. Because they don’t like their results, they get scolded like stupid boys. Rational politicians should be happy when expertise is available to them in difficult times – especially in a country where a dangerous trivialization of expertise could already be observed during the pandemic.