Comment: Olaf Scholz leaves one thing above all – disturbing feelings

Anyone who sat in the Bundestag today and didn’t suffer from cognitive dissonance probably doesn’t feel much of anything else in life. Cognitive dissonance is what social psychologists call the disturbing feeling that arises when two incompatible perceptions collide.

When the shoplifter starts giving a moral sermon. When the chain smoker complains about the fine dust pollution on his street. Or when Olaf Scholz talks about future plans for his chancellorship.

The Chancellor without economic growth. The Chancellor, who has neither a budget nor his own majority. The Chancellor, who himself made the request that the Bundestag meet on this December Monday to withdraw confidence in him.

You don’t have to be a political expert to look at the bare facts and realize that not everything went according to plan. That glaring mistakes were made. That someone has failed miserably here. But Olaf Scholz has no humility; he stands at the lectern and speaks of strength and confidence, of plans and the future. “We are a country that does not have its best days behind it, but ahead of it,” says Scholz.

The opposite could be said about his own political career: as of today, the politician Olaf Scholz is very likely history. As things stand, his SPD will not win the new elections. At best, she will save herself as a junior partner in a Groko or will soon have the opportunity to renew herself in the opposition. Without Scholz.

After three years and eight days in office, what had been clear since November 6th, the day the traffic lights went out, was confirmed legislatively in the Bundestag today: Olaf Scholz has failed as Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Failed due to circumstances such as crises, war and the Constitutional Court, yes. Failed because of coalition partners who argued, blocked, sabotaged or did not have the “moral maturity” necessary for a government (Scholz about the FDP).

But that is at best half the truth. Olaf Scholz failed primarily because of Olaf Scholz. About a man who constantly has to give everyone the feeling that he knew everything earlier and everything better. Failed due to his inability to organize a trialogue between three very different parties. He would have had two options: moderate it or lead it. “Whoever orders leadership from me…” – oh, let’s leave it alone. And yes, moderation also requires a minimum level of willingness to cooperate, a desire that disappeared as the coalition ran out of money.

As far as this is concerned, the presumably incoming chancellor couldn’t fare much better. According to the polls, Friedrich Merz will soon have his own majority, but also no more money. It is the current chancellor who is pointing his finger at the worst, at the next cognitive dissonance: There is still an incredible amount to do, to modernize, to invest in bridges and rails and tanks. “Who do we impose these costs on?” asks Scholz, the employees, the families, the pensioners?

This is a task that will also break a future government if it only promises what is desirable without doing what is necessary. The CDU has formulated what is desirable for pages in its election program; according to economists, it adds up to 100 billion euros. In the year. Friedrich Merz has not yet explained what is necessary in great detail: Where should the coal for this come from?

He wants to raise a double-digit billion sum by abolishing citizens’ money. The economy, apparently inevitably growing under Chancellor Merz, will generate billions more. In other words: they are hopeful values. Hoping that the economy will improve, that tax revenue will increase and social spending will decrease. Hoping that everything gets better somehow.

However, the new coalition members would have to ensure one thing on their own: an awareness of what failed the last government. The inability to reach compromises that last longer than the end of a coalition committee. This is not just a question of political content. It is a question of political stance.

Social psychology has discovered how people react to cognitive dissonance. He does everything to reduce them. Smaller dissonances can be suppressed and, to a certain extent, avoided by actively listening. In the strongest case, the feeling of disruption gives rise to the motivation to change one’s previous behavior.

All election campaigners who are now hoping for swing voters should be warned: people could even say goodbye to the democratic process entirely because of their feelings of disruption.