CSU: The Populist Temptation

No State party will be as hostile as the CSU. Why? Their positions are capable of a majority. Bavaria knows this – and could fail to do so.

CSU: The Populist Temptation

The CSU is currently being massively hostile. Be it for your statements on Islam, your rigorous refugee policy, rejection of border, or crosses on walls – political opponent foams, most commentators also. The CSU was a "security risk", wrote about Süddeutsche Zeitung and called it a "Lega Süd", a allusion to right-wing extremist Italian party. Many of ir positions are capable of majority, especially in bourgeois camp: a majority of people in Bavaria find it good that authorities now have crosses to hang – even more than half of SPD voters like that. 54 percent are at Emnid, 60 percent Dimap to advocate rejection of refugees at border. More than three quarters of Germans want anchor centers for refugees. And when Horst Seehofer postulated at beginning of year that Islam did not belong to Germany, 76 percent agreed with him.

The CSU speaks of what many people think. That is also a task of parties of right center. As a moderate people's party that binds broad strata, CSU could thus stabilize Germany and Europe. Where people's parties have not managed to integrate such majorities into mselves and thus bind to Western canon of values, y are history.

And what is wrong with a majority orientation? Especially in representative democracies, whose principles of domination – elections, votes, parliamentarianism – are precisely based on this. At first glance: nothing. So CSU seems to think too. She's making a serious mistake.

For those who only switched to majorities pursued populism and lost sight of greater whole. Especially since such surveys are never completely unproblematic: it is often asked narrowly, seldom for alternatives and consequences.

The policy of CSU is currently going beyond blowing up of Union, thus erosion of our party system and ultimately of European unification. Bayern take all of this as a residual risk of ir verbal escalation at least because y are intoxicated by thought of actual or supposed majority. The temptation is enormous, just before Landtag election.

The paradox of good majority, dangerous majority is old. In addition to democratic principle of majority, Western democracies have established anor: Liberalism is pushing populist mass to moderation. There are things that are taboo for whims of majority: individual or minority rights about.

Look at people's Mouth

A surplus of liberalism often brings with it certain democratic deficits. But a democracy that does not protect individual is stunted. The "anti-liberal democracy", in which Viktor Orbán is tinkering, ultimately withdraws democracy from its conditions: fair competition for ideas and parties, guaranteed by independent institutions and free media. Those who, like Donald Trump or Polish government, declare mselves to be sole representative of will of people simply because y have a relative majority behind m (or believe), shortens democratic pluralism to quasi-authoritarian monoism. There is a balance between democracy and liberalism.

Critically accompanying CSU in its populist majority mission is refore justified. As long as it does not cross borders, it is, however, a stable part of Union, last People's Party in Germany, important for continued existence of political system and Europe.

Populism is bound to make CSU People's Party. The demagogy lies behind this border. In liberal critique, – Alexander Dobrindt and Markus Söder sometimes do ir part. But border runs right where AfD has ensconced itself: it proceeds in historical revenge, plays with antisemitism, rushes against democratic institutions and ir representatives, despises parliamentarianism like pluralism and ultimately wants Abolish our media system. The list could be continued as desired. Those who hold this for individual cases have not understood racist, authoritarian essence of this party. Those who hold CSU for imitators of AfD also do not.

The CSU should refore be rhetorical in asylum dispute and stop with worsening. The fate of coalition, Union and EU cannot be linked to small factual questions (from 63, from a master plan that still no one knows). Bavaria must be tough in its goal – less in terms of refugees – but must offer face-compromising compromises. To look at people's mouth, but not to talk about word, Franz Josef Strauss has said.

And with all fixation of CSU on what supposedly people want: according to a mirror survey, re is a majority for rejection – but at same time that Angela Merkel remains chancellor. A recent FORSA survey underlines: The majority of Bavaria is dissatisfied with Söders work. Merkel's policy is better off altoger. Politics and opinion-forming are just more complex than binary options: rejection Yes or No.

Date Of Update: 27 June 2018, 12:01

Yorum yapabilmek için üye girişi yapmanız gerekmektedir.

Üye değilseniz hemen üye olun veya giriş yapın.