Hey there! It’s been a while since my last post and it seems I’m all out of practice already. On one hand that means I should try to maintain a higher posting frequency again. On the other hand, this post may feel a bit more awkward than the previous ones. Nothing that can be done there, I’m afraid. So without any further ado, let’s get into it!

The election in Saxony-Anhalt last weekend gained quite some attention - I mean, like, globally. Apparently even Elon Musk and Donald Trump were posting about this on their respective channels, the links to which I’m too lazy to look up right now. The reason behind all the coverage is that the winning party received a whopping 44% of votes at >80% voter turnout. And of course also because the winning party’s programme is apparently aligned with the personal interests of these old rich dudes. After subtracting roughly 7% of votes that went to parties not making the 5% quorum this eventually translates into 47% of seats in the state parliament - really close to the absolute majority. I don’t want to go deep into my own opinions on whether this result is good or bad. There is plenty of outlets everywhere on the internet that can provide perspectives here, and many of them will also do a much better job at laying out evidence and arguments than I ever could. But one observation I want to call out here is the following: The winning party in Saxony-Anhalt is going to have a really hard time setting up a coalition to actually form a working government. And I mean that in the sense that it’s unlike instances of “hard” coalition building from past elections. The difference this time is that all (but one) of the remaining parties that won seats in parliament are fundamentally rejecting any form of cooperation with the winning party. I have heard people arguing that this is a problem. Their argument was that if 44% of a population vote for an extremist political programme then it’s not extreme any more. It just means normality is shifting. Personally I think this argument is on a similar level as the following:

If billions of flies are doing it I, too, should consider eating excrements.

So, let’s say I am not fully convinced. However, I still think it is a pity that we have a party that is entrusted with 47% of parliamentary seats ending up in a position where it struggles to actually do something with it. Because if I have heard one thing repeated over and over by any kind of media in the past couple of years, then it’s this: People hate when governing parties fight out their disagreements in public. It gives the impression that the government unable to exercise power - and who needs a government without power? I view this as the single biggest threat to our democracy. Honestly, at this point I think being anti-democratic is the most important aspect behind people voting for the respective parties. Our democratic system is failing to equip the government with the power to take meaningful action.

Back in the olden days, I believe this was less of an issue because there were just two relevant parties (plus one tiny party people were thinking of mostly as the “king-maker”). The big party was essentially free to rule the country with only minor concession to their (much MUCH smaller) junior partner. In the German language there is a special term for these two former mainstream parties that most people could more or less live with when being in power: The word used to refer to them is Volksparteien. While the direct English translation “People’s party” feels a bit off to me (probably because it feels related to People’s Republics) it’s essentially quite fitting: A representation for the people by the people. To my understanding the important point is to reflect the full diversity of the people within itself while appearing coherent to the outside. Unfortunately, I think we forgot about this part and started believing we lived in a direct democracy where everyone picks from a larger list of parties based on which one best addresses their most immediate and urgent demands. Honorable mention of the Pirate Party Germany at this point as the early proponents of direct democracy. Maybe it could be fair to say that this attempted retrofit the existing system did not work out well from today’s point of view.

So where should we go from here? A thought I was entertaining was to maybe take what is there (a 44% party) and attempt changing it from within. Again, I think the system of Volksparteien was working quite ok. So increasing diversity in a seemingly one-sided party would be the logical fix, no? The only problem I see with that is the historical precedent: Today, we do not look back kindly at early members of the NSDAP. The next best alternative could be bolstering the remains of the former people’s parties. But a lot of trust has been lost which I’m not sure can be rebuilt. And honestly, I would also be afraid of getting stigmatized for entering CDU and (to a lesser extent) the SPD today. I think that is my key take-away here: Let’s try to not judge people for simply signing up for a party. Getting involved in a party should by default be seen as an act of service to our democracy and therefore as an honorable thing to do. Instead we should judge people solely on the goals they state that they want to achieve. Maybe for me the next step would be to put my money where my mouth is and find a local branch of a Vorkspartei I can get involved in.