Hannah Arendt, in her seminal work “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” elucidated how economic despair and societal atomization can precipitate the rise of authoritarian movements. The AfD’s surge mirrors this analysis. Their platform, steeped in nationalism and anti-immigrant rhetoric, has found fertile ground among voters disillusioned by economic stagnation and a perceived erosion of cultural identity. This phenomenon is particularly pronounced in East Germany, where the AfD has made significant inroads.
The historical irony is palpable. East Germany grappled with the authoritarianism of the communist regime, while West Germany prided itself on democratic resilience. This suggests a collective amnesia or perhaps a reinterpretation of history, where the traumas of the past are overshadowed by present anxieties – some of them indeed real, others simply the result of propaganda and fake news also fueled by social media. The AfD’s narrative exploits these fears, drawing parallels to the nationalist fervor that once led Germany down a perilous path.
While it’s true that only about 20% of Germans voted for a neo-Nazi party (as opposed to over 50% of Americans who supported Donald Trump), the message is clear: Authoritarianism is on the rise and traditional parties have so far failed in responding as they remain blind to their own shortcomings.
The recent German federal elections have unveiled a seismic shift in the nation’s political landscape, with the far-right securing approximately 20.8% of the vote, positioning itself as the second-largest party in the Bundestag. Simultaneously, Die Linke achieved a remarkable resurgence, particularly in Berlin, where it garnered 19.9% of the vote, surpassing traditional powerhouses. These developments not only echo the shadows of Germany’s tumultuous past but also underscore the profound economic and social discontent pervading the country.
Die Linke’s Berlin victory can be interpreted as a manifestation of “Ostalgie,” a nostalgia for certain aspects of East German life, combined with a repudiation of neoliberal policies that many feel have exacerbated inequality. Die Linke’s platform, advocating for wealth redistribution and enhanced social services, resonates with Berliners facing soaring rents and precarious employment. The party’s success in Berlin underscores a desire to address systemic inequities, reflecting a complex relationship with the city’s divided history, but also clashes with the party’s links with Moscow and its stance on Ukraine and EU integration.
Central to the electoral successes of both the AfD and Die Linke is the prevailing economic discontent. Germany, long lauded for its robust economy, now faces challenges including high energy costs and fierce global competition, particularly from China. These issues have eroded the financial security of many citizens, leading to widespread anxiety about the future – not unlike 1930’s Germany if I’m allowed some catastrophism.
The traditional centrist parties, notably the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), have been criticized for policies perceived as favoring the affluent, neglecting the working class’s struggles. This detachment has created a vacuum, which the AfD and Die Linke have adeptly filled by positioning themselves as champions of the disenfranchised. The AfD’s emphasis on national sovereignty and Die Linke’s calls for economic reform offer divergent solutions to the same underlying issue: a populace disillusioned with the status quo looking at the fringes for help.
The situation is not so different elsewhere in Europe, with fringe parties such as Vlaams Belang in Belgium, Vox in Spain or National Rally in France have also increased their share of voters. In Austria, the far-right is close to forming the new government and when we say “far-right” we are in fact being sympathetic to parties that openly flirt with Nazism and that have among their members elements that openly defend such an ideology.
The fact is that the blurring lines between center-left and center-right have culminated in a political identity crisis. Both spectrums have converged on neoliberal economic policies, leading to a homogenization that fails to address the nuanced concerns of the electorate. This indistinguishability has alienated voters, prompting them to seek alternatives that promise real change -whatever that might be.
The SPD’s historic low of 16.4% in the recent elections exemplifies this decline. Once the vanguard of the working class, the party’s shift towards centrist policies has diluted its original mission, resulting in a loss of trust among its base. Similarly, the CDU’s traditional conservatism appears insufficient in addressing contemporary economic woes, further propelling voters towards the fringes with the party itself now aligning with the far-right in certain key issues.
The AfD’s rise has not occurred in isolation; it has been bolstered by endorsements from prominent U.S. figures such as Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Musk, in particular, has been vocal in his support, stating on social media that “Only the AfD can save Germany.” Such endorsements have been met with criticism within Germany, with officials accusing Musk of attempting to influence the election.
These interventions by U.S. far-right figures add a layer of complexity to Germany’s political dynamics. They not only amplify the AfD’s message but also introduce external pressures that can sway public opinion and exacerbate existing divisions. The global interconnectedness facilitated by social media platforms allows for such cross-border political influences, complicating the domestic electoral landscape.
Germany stands at a critical juncture. The ascendancy of the AfD and the resurgence of Die Linke are symptomatic of deeper societal fissures. Hannah Arendt’s insights into the origins of totalitarianism serve as a cautionary tale; the allure of simplistic solutions during times of crisis can lead to the erosion of democratic principles.
Austerity policies that only benefit the rich and concentrate wealth in the hands of the few, tax increases for the population and cuts for the richest, full employment policies that in the end only demand more from the worker – more contributions, more years of work, more hours dedicated to ‘bullshit jobs’ – but deliver lower wages and fewer hours of leisure with lame excuses about the pension crisis while every day new billionaires emerge and secure their benefits through political influence and lobbying only generate more support for the political extremes with easy yet fake magical solutions.
Addressing the root causes of this political shift necessitates a multifaceted approach, but above all, traditional parties need to take up their historic banners and their historic place. Economic reforms that prioritize equitable growth, coupled with social policies that foster inclusion, are imperative. Moreover, a reinvigoration of centrist parties to authentically represent the working class and marginalized communities could restore faith in traditional political structures.
We need to learn the lessons Arendt taught us and understand the population’s dissatisfaction: authoritarian options with simple solutions to complex problems will emerge and enchant, the centre needs to be prepared – but to act and not just to keep talking because at some point the population will stop listening. Actually, it has already stopped listening.
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
