Bundestag election 2021: In the four-way battle of the “smaller ones” there was finally something going on

Bundestag election 2021: In the four-way battle of the “smaller ones” there was finally something going on

When four people argue: There was a lot of tinder between the “smaller parties”. It was pimped, etched, taught. Finally something other than the eternal Triell-dreariness. Definitely more exciting than watching water boil.

By Sylvie-Sophie Schindler

Do the Germans have to throw away the car key? Where do the sabers rattle? Does anyone have a soft spot for Russia here? Is the world laughing at Germany’s climate plans? There was a lot going on at the ARD live four-way battle on Monday evening – one day after the TV triall of the Chancellor candidates. The top candidates of the current opposition parties FDP, Left and AfD delivered their statements on topics such as NATO alliance, pensions, climate protection, tax and education policy, for 75 minutes.

The four-way fight concept has a logic flaw

The CSU was also invited as a so-called “smaller party” with a representative. You may take it for granted, but you can also criticize it. Even if the CSU is the largest party of all four, measured by the number of members, the question may be asked: Why the CSU, of all things, which can only be elected in Bavaria and where Union politician Armin Laschet was already in the battle the night before – the CSU wears around 20 percent of the overall result of the Union in the federal elections. Even if, as is well known, there is not always agreement between the sister parties – see extended mothers’ pension – the four-way battle concept has a certain logic flaw here. Or to put it another way: one should consequently have invited to an exclusive opposition triall – or, and that would be much more exciting, to a six-way fight.

The “four fighters” in alphabetical order:

  • Alexander Dobrindt, CSU regional group leader
  • Christian Lindner, FDP Chief
  • Alice Weidel, AfD parliamentary group leader
  • Janine Wissler, Left Chair

The moderators Ellen Ehni (WDR) and Christian Nitsche (BR) seemed very structured and well coordinated. Sometimes they remained pale in places, sometimes they hooked up particularly sharply, sometimes too impatiently. The participants complained several times, mostly rightly, that they wanted to be allowed to finish speaking. Because the dialogue discipline of the politicians suffered in umpteen places – lousy messy talk – the existing trainer qualities of the hosts were in demand again and again. Nevertheless: finally something is going on. Rather something goes under and everything haywire than the eternal Triell-dreariness. And suddenly you prefer to look at the screen rather than the boiling water on the stove.

“Mr. Dobrindt, stop smiling now”

Christian Lindner took on the role of the nerd in the group. No matter what he said, the subtext always seemed to be, “I know my way around the best.” Janine Wissler, the liveliest and most combative of all, thanked him once sarcastically with “Thank you for the lecture”. Again and again it rumbled between the two. When it came to the climate issue, the left-wing politician caught a Lindner ruff: “Have you become a natural scientist now?”

Alexander Dobrindt looked like a friend; As it turned out, one shouldn’t be fooled by this, because he too had verbal knives in his luggage. Everything seemed to roll off Alice Weidel. In her frosty composure she looked like a mixture of ice queen and Fraulein Rottenmeier from “Heidi”. But she, too, regularly messed with Lindner in a harsh tone. When he praised the Swedish pension model, which the FDP also wants to implement, according to which the state administers appropriate shares for the population on the stock market, she reprimanded him as a senior teacher: “You have no idea about asset management, Mr. Lindner.”

What happens to the car keys now? According to Wissler’s remarks, which was the only one to plead for a ban on internal combustion engines by 2030 and for an unconditional turnaround in traffic, Dobrindt’s forecast was: “Not only if you choose the Greens, you can throw your car key in the bin after the election, but also if you do one chooses the left. ” Wissler annoyed: “That’s a polemic now.” You are not saying that nobody is allowed to drive a car anymore, that is obvious. “The craftsman doesn’t take the subway.” It’s also difficult in the country, but that’s where improvements can be made by expanding public transport. Elsewhere, Wissler snapped: “Oh, Mr. Dobrindt, stop smiling now.” The hooks continued, the CSU politician said that hydrogen as a new form of energy was “God given”. Wissler sarcastically: “God-given because of it.” In short: the debate about the climate was particularly heated.

Lindner wanted to give the lead here too. You have to do everything possible to be the “technology world champion”. Weidel’s stoic expression, implied smile. She thinks nothing of the “German Sonderweg”, which damages the business location: “No industrial country can be operated in any way with fluttering electricity.” Wissler grumbled indignantly: “Flutterstrom!” Weidel became even more drastic: “Nobody is imitating the climate change. Foreign countries are laughing at us, everyone is laughing at us.” And grumpy to Lindner: “And you know that too.” He, in turn, wanted to know what else she was proposing. “The instruments are wrong,” said Weidel. Lindner stayed with it: “What is the alternative – your party is called Alternative for Germany.” There was no answer.

Gasping for air, irritation and right-left convergence

On the other hand, there was a clear announcement regarding NATO. Last week, left-wing politician Katja Kipping surprisingly signaled to Markus Lanz that they “could come to an agreement” with the SPD – Olaf Scholz demands a clear commitment to NATO from possible coalition partners – so Wissler gave no leeway to recognize: “We want dissolve NATO. ” Instead, they want to build a collective security alliance. Russia should be included here.

Aha, so she has a soft spot for Russia, moderator Nitsche interjected provocatively. Wissler gasped for air. That was clearly going too far for her. “I have absolutely no sympathy for the Russian regime,” she said loudly. But it is now important to pursue a policy of détente worldwide, she does not want any confrontations with Russia. “We don’t need a saber rattle from NATO,” Wissler added. Lindner irritated: “Where can you get that?” He later criticized that the USA should not be equated with Russia and China. Basically, the democratic principles apply: “Everyone must obey the rules.” Weidel approached Wissler’s position. Russia is an important geostrategic actor and the channels of communication have to be kept open.

The discussion in the final sprint: One had the feeling that the combatants had warmed up and could happily continue to deal with each other. But time was pressing. The last question: Oh, by the way, Mr. Lindner, what about a traffic light coalition? You know that the FDP can thus prevent red-red-green.

What the moderator said sounded like an insult to majesty in Lindner’s ears. His top-down answer: “Prevention is a very modest claim to design.” You are an independent party. “We want Germany to continue to be governed from the center.” He regretted that the Union was “surprisingly weakened”. Because the similarities in terms of content are greater than with any other. So again, a traffic light coalition? The moderator urged the FDP man to give a clear answer. In the end, he said he did not know what offer Red-Green could make to the FDP: “I lack the imagination here.”

Source Link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest Posts