Dhe round of talks at Maybrit Illner is almost 65 minutes old when Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) formulates an interesting thought: A widespread explanation for the strengthening of right-wing populists has long been that there is too much consensus in the middle. More extreme views have been marginalized. In the traffic light coalition, conflicting positions are now openly apparent, parties show differences. Now it is the divergences that worry the audience – “We need to deal with differences more confidently,” says Lindner.
The FDP chairman makes an important point. Political competition can be fun. But the situation has been difficult, especially since the Russian attack on Ukraine in February 2022, so that there is little joy in governing. The energy crisis, which is reflected in high electricity prices, combines the geopolitical naivety of governments over the past three decades with the unresolved problem of ongoing global warming. At the same time, it brought to mind the forgotten phenomenon of inflation.
This Thursday, Illner brought together the usual low-risk composition of guests who stayed in their respective roles, which made the dispute seem routine again. Party chairmen Lindner and Ricarda Lang (Greens) tried to dispel the impression of a chaotic government that CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann wanted to spread. In addition, the journalist Eva Quadbeck (editor-in-chief of the editorial network Germany), who explained the big picture, did a good job. And the social association chairwoman Verena Bentele, who, as a representative of disadvantaged groups, is adept at drawing attention to the weaknesses of the welfare state.
What are the strengths of talk show guests?
Is this kind of debate fun? Or does it at least encourage Lindner’s intention to deal with differences more confidently? But the time between 10:15 p.m. and 11:20 p.m. once again gave some object lessons. Government representatives are always particularly convincing when they can make details of government action and the legislative process transparent and outline political projects. Opposition politicians are good at putting their fingers in wounds and objectively pointing out deficits. Skilled journalists can draw a larger framework and stakeholders can name grievances.
It is less successful when the roles are reversed and politicians are asked to explain where the public’s impression comes from that the government is overwhelmed or on the wrong foot. It is of little use to give them an area for justification and then, like Robert Habeck, to argue with stylized self-criticism that narrowly ignores the problem and at the same time draw new strength from the supposed weakness. Whenever Illner asks the two coalition partners in this direction, which is particularly the case in the first third, the viewers get unproductive discussions about the past.
Linnemann, on the other hand, tries to throw one punch after the other. Some things seem plausible (wrong setting of priorities, as with the intended legalization of cannabis, neglect of rural areas), others, on the other hand, carnivalesque (the will to perform is lost with the reform of the national youth games and new training methods in the youth field of the German Football Association). His criticism can be summed up in a nutshell: “I’m not badmouthing the country, it’s good. The government is bad.”
#criticism #tolerate #differences