Status of the traffic light coalition: ripe for couples therapy


comment

As of: 03/22/2023 4:31 p.m

After 15 months of “progress coalition” only the disruption of the traffic light is progressive. The three partners are ready for couples therapy. In the interests of the people who elected them.

A comment by Georg Schwarte, ARD capital studio

progress coalition. Anyone remember? “Dare to make more progress” was written above the traffic light coalition agreement. At that time. A touch of Willy Brandt. 15 months later, the incumbent Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck said: It cannot be that only one coalition partner – namely the Greens – is responsible for progress and the other two – SPD and FDP – for preventing it.

Traffic light routine in March 2023. Punctures. breach of trust. The partners argue, intrigue and mob towards wild boar and cucumber troop level. Union and FDP were the last to do this in 2010, after 16 months of the black-yellow coalition.

Too much scholz?

Now, after 15 months, the traffic light seems ripe for couples therapy. In the coalition, all partners are now asked to sit down with a little more calm, composure and objectivity, says Green Party leader Ricarda Lang, chief therapist of the busted traffic light flat share.

Serenity. Quiet. objectivity. More Scholz is actually not verbally. But maybe the factual Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz is also a bit relaxed without a resting pulse. His motto so far has been: Children, be confident. Will already with all traffic light projects. He’s been saying that in front of and behind the cameras for weeks. It’s a confident “I’ll be fine”.

And if the FDP keeps losing elections?

At the latest when the FDP lands where it last landed in the next state elections in Bremen, Bavaria and Hesse, namely in political oblivion, “it will be fine” will probably become “it will be nothing”. That is when the free radicals in the FDP will probably really get going.

State philosopher Habeck likes to quote his oath of office. It obliges him and all ministers to solve problems. “We’re all not up for it,” says the Green Vice-Chancellor. Really all?

Of goat and no goat

The FDP is in the mood for the market. She doesn’t feel like being banned. The SPD is just in the mood to watch and comments at best with concern as the Greens and FDP are increasingly no longer in the mood for each other. And the chancellor? In the mood for confident calm and serenity. Maybe Scholz should feel like telling his progressive coalition in front of or behind closed doors: “Pull yourself together, otherwise people won’t want us anymore.”

If progress only consists in expressing one another as rudely as possible, then – and only then – is the FDP clearly the most progressive.

Kubicki regularly attracts attention with nonsense

Its deputy party leader, Wolfgang Kubicki, publicly compared Habeck with the war criminal Vladimir Putin and said: Both represent the philosophy that people must be forced to be happy. Seriously? Comparing Habeck with Putin in the dispute over combustion engines and heating systems makes wild sows and cucumber troops affectionate in retrospect. The fact that Kubicki, who doesn’t seem to be too bad about any poisonous-juicy headline, has apologized and says that was nonsense only partially makes things better. Because Kubicki regularly attracts attention with nonsense.

If you don’t get noticed, you can’t win any sympathy, says communicator Kubicki. Do such gaffes actually make the FDP more sympathetic? Is the FDP better off when the traffic light is worse off? Are the Greens happy when Jürgen Trittin classifies the FDP man Christian Lindner as part of an “ideologically motivated squad of Porsche fans” in the dispute over the future of the combustion car?

Everyone has now understood that the traffic light is ultimately just a coalition with interests. But if everyone at the traffic light understood that the interests of the citizens are also and above all at stake, a lot would be gained.

When progress becomes progressive disruption

Georg Schwarte, ARD Berlin, March 22, 2023 2:57 p.m

Editorial note

Comments always reflect the opinion of the respective author and not that of the editors.

source site