On 19.05.22 07:13, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:
Felix has called the coalition between the Greens and the conservatives "weird". I think it is weird only from the perspective of the 20th century assumptions about what it means to be left and right, conservative or progressive. These parameters have been shifting for a while, and when it comes to the relationship between the German Green party, and the economy, and pacifism, we might indeed see a phase change. This phenomenon looks "weird" only if you believe in "old physics". In the new time, we - and the "Ost-Ausschuss der Deutschen Wirtschaft" - have to get used to the idea that Putin's war in Ukraine is spurring the defossilisation of the German chemical industry.

I agree, calling this alliance between Green and Conservatives "weird" is very superficial. There is a lot that is not weird. For one, the social basis of the Green and Conservative electorate overlap quite significantly, and it's no coincidence that they managed to win (and hold) power in one of the most conservative areas of German (Baden-Württemberg). Second, once in power, they tend enact policies that are largely in favor of capital. Again, see the Green's record in Baden-Württemberg, or, here in Austria. This sharply limits their environmental, feminist, humanitarian agendas. To be fair, this is also what gets them in power in the first place....

However, to think the relationship is not weird because German industry will happily wean itself off fossil fuels is really mistaken. Again, look at what happened where they are in power. I don't see that they really managed to get the German car makers to shift to electric vehicles. It's more the opposite. In Baden-Württemberg they became boosters for conventional cars.

To the degree that this shift is happening in the automotive industry, it's more, sorry, Elon Musk's achievement than of the Greens. And, even then, electric cars are more about saving the industry then the environment (for that, it's too little, too late). Also, the most radical the Greens have done so far in relation to Russian fossil fuels is to ditch environmental regulations and built LNG terminals. Again, understand the pragmatics of it, but this is certainly no Energiewende "shock doctrin."

The weird part of the alliance, in my view, comes from the fact that their stance towards the war is motivated by fundamentally different concerns. For the Greens, the value-driven, idealistic, international solidarity dimensions are really important. Just listen to the foreign minister and how personally she feels the pain of the victims. I have nothing against that. But, this is paired with Conservatives whose motivations are nationalistic, militaristic and machistic. Finally, the post-heroism of post-war Germany can be laid to rest. Now, the young heroes are back in. Finally, move over 68er! This is literally the response of the conservatives at FAZ to Habermas. This is fundamentally incompatible with a feminist foreign policy if this means more than adding "rape" to the list of prosecutable war crimes (again, nothing against that).

But all of this takes place within a framework that asserts the nation state as source of identity and power. And, historically, this has never been 'progressive' at least not in the last 150 years of German history (I would count the 1848 revolution, failed as it was, a progressive version of the national impulse). This, I think, is what troubles Habermas, and it troubles me too.

| |||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com |
| for secure communication, please use signal |
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to