Protest against energy costs: “Polarization mobilizes more strongly”

Energy costs are a concern for many people. Left and AfD are drumming for the “hot autumn”. Unions and social organizations are now calling for a “fall of solidarity”. Political scientist Münch on the “anger of the angry” and mistakes in traffic lights.

tagesschau.de: This weekend, a broad alliance of trade unions, social organizations and environmental groups want to demonstrate for more social security in the energy crisis in several German cities. Is the protest now forming from the left so as not to give up the streets to the right-wing groups?

Ursula Munch: The alliance is calling for an “autumn of solidarity.” Of course, it’s about the energy crisis, but also about solidarity with Ukraine. This is in contrast to the demonstrations organized by right-wing populist forces who want to shift responsibility for the war and the rising prices on to the federal government: their protests are also generally directed against those in government, against the so-called system. They accuse the federal government of “warmongering” and want to get back to good German-Russian relations.

However, some of the demands of the left and right-wing groups sound similar: The state must give significantly more financial help to those who do not know how to make ends meet in the winter.

The anger of the angry

tagesschau.de: The protests organized by right-wing groups have been growing for weeks, with 100,000 people taking to the streets nationwide on German Unity Day alone. What role does the permanent mobilization of the years before play, keyword: “Pegida” and Corona?

Munch: Mobilization always works well by further fueling and channeling the anger of the Enraged. For example against the establishment, the political elite, the economy. Those who rely on a more balanced choice of words, such as the alliance for “autumn solidarity”, often find it more difficult to mobilize the masses. Polarization mobilizes more.

tagesschau.de: What role do parties play in the protests?

Munch: It is not the political parties that are calling for a “fall of solidarity” but rather trade unions, social and environmental organizations. The situation is different with the so-called Monday demonstrations and similar protests in predominantly East German cities: You see many AfD posters, but you also see the far-right “Free Saxony”. The AfD clearly has a partisan interest in these protests. It exploits the justified fears of many people in view of the many major crises. The concerns of the people and the calculations of the AfD are mutually beneficial.

Divided society?

tagesschau.de: Sometimes the protests from the far right and the far left are mixed up, and the boundaries seem to be blurring. Alice Weidel and Sahra Wagenknecht sometimes sound very similar in their choice of words, for example when talking about the “economic war against Russia”.

Munch: Ms. Wagenknecht does not speak for the Left Party. The left is also trying to distance itself from Wagenknecht because it doesn’t want to be lumped together too much with the AfD. But you have to listen carefully to see the differences. The Left Party differentiates more with regard to who caused the war. But it’s a fine line for the party. It’s in a political struggle for survival, and its skins are swimming away in its former East German strongholds – to the AfD.

tagesschau.de: There are repeated warnings of a split in society. Is there something to it?

Munch: I think this diagnosis is wrong. Part of society is very angry and can therefore be easily mobilized. But that’s at least a manageable group of people at the moment. But there is interest in speaking of the division in society, for example in the AfD or the Left Party. Because if one speaks of a division in society and not of a splitting off of a minority, one suggests greatness. However, we are dealing with a vocal minority, which – I do not dispute – can grow. And which has an interest in fueling the legitimate concerns of many people about further price increases. It’s not about taking care of people’s concerns, it’s about spreading the concerns.

tagesschau.de: CDU Secretary-General Mario Czaja fears a “winter of rage”; Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock warned of “popular uprisings” in a deliberately exaggerated formulation. So it’s by no means just the political fringe that speaks up here with striking terms.

Munch: You can also talk about a lot. If you look at how many very concrete reliefs there are now and what is still planned, you should let go of this dangerous alarmism. Please don’t pretend that we don’t have a functioning welfare state.

There is a lot of dissent in the traffic light

tagesschau.de: However, satisfaction with the federal government is at a low point. How can that be with all the good deeds?

Munch: The traffic light government has recently given a chaotic picture. She seemed haphazard and unable to act in the face of the many crises. Just think of the gas surcharge. The back and forth irritates many people and also unsettles them. And now the tug-of-war over nuclear power. The dissatisfaction of many people is therefore understandable.

But the weaknesses in the three-party alliance’s ability to act are no coincidence: three partners govern together, brought together not by their political proximity but by their political majorities. There is a lot of dissent between the SPD, Greens and FDP, which is not well received, especially in these uncertain times. But we have never had such an immensely challenging situation – and that under the conditions of a highly disparate federal government with three partners. That doesn’t excuse anything, but it explains why the traffic light is struggling.

“Warm words are not enough”

tagesschau.de: Nevertheless, the impression remains that there are many warm words from the Chancellor, but that alone does not warm up the apartment in winter. The opposition complains that many of the relief measures come too late, such as the gas price cap from March. And the countries are also demanding more speed.

Munch: That’s correct. The warm words are not enough. But if the gas levy debacle showed one thing, it was: beware of quick, big solutions or unbureaucratic help. Even relief based on the watering can principle makes little sense. It’s more about who needs the money, who doesn’t – and how the money gets to the right people. During the Corona crisis, we saw how quickly abuse can be committed with unbureaucratic help. An instrument like the gas price cap cannot therefore be implemented within a week. It’s more complicated.