M.an generally speaks of logic if one draws the appropriate conclusions from assumptions. Of course, this does not say anything about whether the assumptions are correct. We had last seen this in the pandemic with the federal emergency brake. It had its logic, although otherwise it made no understandable sense. In this respect, one could agree with the journalist Robin Alexander when he said last night at “Hart aber fair” that the ideas of the Greens about the increase in petrol prices were more logical than those of the grand coalition. After all, it is about reducing the amount of driving a car.
Ricarda Lang (Greens) was visibly pleased with the compliment from this unfamiliar source, after all, the daily newspaper “Die Welt” is not exactly one of the journalistic supporters of her party. The reaction of the CSU General Secretary Markus Blume was more astonishing. He referred to the increase in the commuter allowance to compensate for the additional burdens on citizens. But he seemed to share Alexander’s assumption.
What is politics interested in?
This could have something to do with the fact that the ecological tax reform, which has been discussed for almost forty years, is intellectually uncharted territory for the CSU. After all, she had always opposed this policy. Their basic idea of a slow but steady increase in the price of fossil fuels should by no means force a change in the consumer behavior of the citizens through draconian taxation. Rather, using price signals to make the switch to other products attractive to citizens. The charm lies in the fact that the state defines the framework conditions, but it can leave the implementation to the market. Companies and consumers will find the right solutions, not the state bureaucracy.
Now is not the place to recount the debate over the past few decades. The state had repeatedly increased mineral oil and VAT, but for fiscal reasons. Even then, a steering effect could be determined, cars and heating systems became more efficient. All of this was forgotten, as unfortunately happened last night. Otherwise it would not occur to anyone to want to deprive the majority of the German population in rural areas of mobility.
That would be the logical consequence if a future federal government tried to implement Alexander’s acceptance. There really couldn’t have been a better way of documenting the extensive loss of competence in parts of our political class. She no longer even understands her own programmatic approaches, but replaces them with scientifically sounding phraseology. Then there is talk of “transformation”, that sounds good. Or about “social climate policy”, that sounds even better, like with Ms. Lang. In return, Blume raved about a “campaign against drivers and mobility.” That was the Christian social sound of the past decades, when the ecological tax reform was still resolutely blocked.