AA politician can also be an institution. Wolfgang Schäuble was one of them. Pessimists say that unfortunately there are fewer and fewer of them. Optimists say that this has always been the exception. And would it be better if people created their institutions and not the institutions created the politicians? At the moment, in Western democracies it looks as if the institutions are taking too much of a backseat to personalities and those who think they are. This is perceived as a danger. Rightly so.
However, democracies need politicians who embody their institutions. Schäuble was a phenomenon precisely because of his long time as a member of the Bundestag and not only because of his tragic vulnerability after an assassination attempt. He was able to combine the two like no other: whatever office was given to him, people knew that he would not make it a showpiece to raise his profile, but would take a back seat to the size and purpose of his task in the spirit of constitutional traditions.
But not without the ambition to shine. There were two Christian Democratic chancellors above him, but alongside Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel there was always the irreplaceable Wolfgang Schäuble.
The basis for this was his ethos as a parliamentarian. The Bundestag was the beginning and end of the CDU politician's career. While many politicians like to use it as a springboard for the executive branch, for Schäuble the parliament remained the heart chamber of democracy. This gave him independence and allowed him to exercise his talent for impatiently testing boundaries without tearing down boundaries. Schäuble as an institution, which is what his breaking of taboos and his sometimes grim and humorous provocations have made him that way.
What he said had to be said
For him they never served to criticize the system, they were rarely an end in themselves, they were often intended to shake things up in order to resolve confusing situations and show new paths. This is what distinguishes this kind of transgression from third-rate provocateurs who seek to disrespect or, worse, degrade institutions. Here, too, Schäuble stood for the measure and the middle: Anyone who wants to maintain democratic institutions must keep them alive through their personality, which can also mean polarizing them. Finally, Schäuble did it again in fundamental terms: national defense, debt brake, work ethic. What he said had to be said.
The Chancellor is generally assigned such a dominant role in the Federal Republic of Germany's power structure. However, this usually comes with expectations that he cannot fulfill. Schäuble had to live with the label of the eternal “second man”, the “crown prince”, words that did not fit at all with his republican conception of the state. The fact that he did not become head of government, a position that he would have had several times, may be interpreted as a weakness or a lack of grit. A lot contributed to this. The reason, however, is likely to be found primarily in loyalty, which made him shy away from ultimately believing he was the better guy. He stabbed neither Kohl nor Merkel in the back, although there were opportunities and calls to do so. The strength of second best is, as Schäuble once said, “to endure leadership.”
We will miss him
Such characteristics, as well as personality, party and profile, have earned him the ascription as a “conservative” – exceptionally for German conditions with a reverent undertone. On the one hand, the characterization undoubtedly reflects the world of a politician who wanted to preserve the democratic and economic order during reunification, in Europe, in crises of all kinds, but also in the everyday life of his political work, which Germany is not, as some “conservatives” think, weak and threatens to make it decadent, but has made life worth living like never before.
On the other hand, the “conservative” Schäuble does not fit in with his liberal Baden homeland, which likes to adhere to the principle: live and let live. The irreconcilable contradictions seen in this, between the liberal spirit and conservative attitudes, have been one of the greatest defects in the political discourse of the Federal Republic for years, one might almost say since the ideologically charged time when Schäuble was elected to the Bundestag for the first time. Others have been added, but the Federal Republic is still a haven of stability. Responsible for this are the much-maligned politicians, who are rarely blameless, but are often far better than their reputation. However, it is rarely enough to become an institution. But without them it doesn't work. We will miss Wolfgang Schäuble.
#Wolfgang #Schäuble39s #legacy #death #CDU #politician