The role of the Christian Democrats is an exciting one, as CDU politicians miss every opportunity to emphasize how badly the traffic lights are running and that the world would be a better place under Chancellor Merz.
In doing so, they skilfully sweep under the carpet how the CDU has worked with the traffic light on almost all of the major issues of recent years. No matter whether it is armament, austerity policy or
Ukrainian war.
Traffic lights and the CDU are two sides of the same coin. Fundamental differences can hardly be found. Against this background, it is exciting to see how established politics wants to write into the German Basic Law the functions of institutions that serve the established politics.
This makes it more difficult for other, democratically legitimate majorities to carry out reforms in these institutions. Using the example of the debt brake, we can already see what problems are created by virtually suspending political competition.
The Tagesschau headlines on March 28, 2024, "Apparently a change to the Basic Law is planned: Agreement on protecting the Constitutional Court?" The Tagesschau also writes, "How can the Constitutional Court be better protected from the influence of extreme parties? According to media reports, there are further discussions about this between the government and Union - and apparently a first draft law." In public, the supporters are concerned with protecting the Federal Constitutional Court from the influence of extreme parties.
But who decides what is extreme and what is not? The draft of the so-called Democracy Promotion Act provides a clue. This draft lists the "delegitimization of the state" as the reason why this law is necessary.
But what exactly is such delegitimization? The wording is kept open.
Can it ultimately lead to criticism of the functioning of state institutions or actions of politicians and state officials being seen as delegitimization and therefore extreme?
That's not impossible. Perhaps the so-called Office for the Protection of the Constitution will soon be knocking on the doors of innocent citizens who are interested in the foreign policy of the world's best foreign minister of all time,
Annalena Baerbock, leave it out. Specifically, the plan to change the Basic Law is that Ampel and the CDU are rearranging Articles 93 and 94. Article 93 states independence
of the Federal Constitutional Court vis-à-vis all other constitutional bodies. This is exciting because this formulation implies that the Federal Constitutional Court is politically independent today. In reality, however, the 16 judges are each elected half by the Bundestag and half by the Bundesrat. Politicians have a direct influence on the composition of the Federal Constitutional Court. In addition, the judges often have party books or are close to the parties that nominate them.
Mention should be made of the former Prime Minister of Saarland (1999 to 2011) and constitutional judge (2011 to 2023) Peter Müller (CDU).
Against this background, it seems as if there is a power political calculation behind the current approach of Ampel and the CDU. They seem to be interested in maintaining their own influence and establishing the status quo.
For many decades, the political influence of the established parties was obvious
not a big problem. Now that new players have entered the political arena with the AfD or the Sahra Wagenknecht alliance and are questioning and attacking the interpretive sovereignty of the established forces, the established parties are trying to secure "their" institutions.
They want to make change virtually impossible and narrow the legal framework for politically unwelcome reforms. Those in power are in retreat on many levels and are letting their politicians respond with authoritarian measures.
They try to maintain their hegemony and power, which ends in censorship and exclusion of unpleasant opinions.
Sources:
No.1 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at 10:27 a.m.)
No.2 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at
10:03 a.m.)
No.3 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at 10:23 a.m.)
04/02/24
Marlon is 25 years old, a student of social economics and runs the YouTube channel "marlonsmeinung".
In doing so, they skilfully sweep under the carpet how the CDU has worked with the traffic light on almost all of the major issues of recent years. No matter whether it is armament, austerity policy or
Ukrainian war.
Traffic lights and the CDU are two sides of the same coin. Fundamental differences can hardly be found. Against this background, it is exciting to see how established politics wants to write into the German Basic Law the functions of institutions that serve the established politics.
This makes it more difficult for other, democratically legitimate majorities to carry out reforms in these institutions. Using the example of the debt brake, we can already see what problems are created by virtually suspending political competition.
The Tagesschau headlines on March 28, 2024, "Apparently a change to the Basic Law is planned: Agreement on protecting the Constitutional Court?" The Tagesschau also writes, "How can the Constitutional Court be better protected from the influence of extreme parties? According to media reports, there are further discussions about this between the government and Union - and apparently a first draft law." In public, the supporters are concerned with protecting the Federal Constitutional Court from the influence of extreme parties.
But who decides what is extreme and what is not? The draft of the so-called Democracy Promotion Act provides a clue. This draft lists the "delegitimization of the state" as the reason why this law is necessary.
But what exactly is such delegitimization? The wording is kept open.
Can it ultimately lead to criticism of the functioning of state institutions or actions of politicians and state officials being seen as delegitimization and therefore extreme?
That's not impossible. Perhaps the so-called Office for the Protection of the Constitution will soon be knocking on the doors of innocent citizens who are interested in the foreign policy of the world's best foreign minister of all time,
Annalena Baerbock, leave it out. Specifically, the plan to change the Basic Law is that Ampel and the CDU are rearranging Articles 93 and 94. Article 93 states independence
of the Federal Constitutional Court vis-à-vis all other constitutional bodies. This is exciting because this formulation implies that the Federal Constitutional Court is politically independent today. In reality, however, the 16 judges are each elected half by the Bundestag and half by the Bundesrat. Politicians have a direct influence on the composition of the Federal Constitutional Court. In addition, the judges often have party books or are close to the parties that nominate them.
Mention should be made of the former Prime Minister of Saarland (1999 to 2011) and constitutional judge (2011 to 2023) Peter Müller (CDU).
Against this background, it seems as if there is a power political calculation behind the current approach of Ampel and the CDU. They seem to be interested in maintaining their own influence and establishing the status quo.
For many decades, the political influence of the established parties was obvious
not a big problem. Now that new players have entered the political arena with the AfD or the Sahra Wagenknecht alliance and are questioning and attacking the interpretive sovereignty of the established forces, the established parties are trying to secure "their" institutions.
They want to make change virtually impossible and narrow the legal framework for politically unwelcome reforms. Those in power are in retreat on many levels and are letting their politicians respond with authoritarian measures.
They try to maintain their hegemony and power, which ends in censorship and exclusion of unpleasant opinions.
Sources:
No.1 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at 10:27 a.m.)
No.2 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at
10:03 a.m.)
No.3 (last accessed on March 30, 2024 at 10:23 a.m.)
04/02/24
Marlon is 25 years old, a student of social economics and runs the YouTube channel "marlonsmeinung".
Write a comment