Enlarge image
Annalene Baerbock
Photo:
Sean Gallup / Getty Images
I mean, it was last week that I was puzzled when I looked over page 1 of the »Süddeutsche«. For the first time in a very long time,
the
topic was
missing
, no news, not even the word:
Corona
. I wanted to keep the page - as evidence of a turning point: In the foreseeable future, the pandemic in Germany as a state of emergency for society as a whole will be over. What begins then should not be missed by any sociologist, because it will be a large-scale experiment with over 60 million voting subjects: Do the majority of people want their old life back after the summer? Or do we breathlessly switch to the next major construction site, to the next state of emergency, this time called climate rescue? How the majority opts here will undoubtedly be decided by the federal election.
Experienced liberals and conservatives know about things: One should not tackle the rescue of humanity without people, even if they are as they are and not always as they should be.
As an individual and as a group, people can surpass themselves at any time, I firmly believe in that, but they cannot do it 365 days a year.
He also cannot be addressed in alarm mode forever, as the weaknesses of the governmental corona communication have shown.
Tremolo turns into tinnitus in the end, if a society is not allowed to take a deep breath.
Or as the French say:
Il faut reculer pour mieux sauter.
(For example: "You have to step back (one step) to be able to jump better.")
A lockdown for the climate?
Climate activists, on the other hand, see it differently.
For them, saving humanity from global warming is just as urgent as it is from the virus.
Already today it is a matter of life and death like in the intensive care unit during the pandemic.
Ergo: If almost all flights have been canceled due to Corona, can it stay that way because it benefits climate protection?
Car-empty city centers, anyone in the home office?
Can stay that way.
In the first corona wave, world trade collapsed and many factories in Germany stood still?
This thought also seems to be the anti-capitalist mainstream at
FridaysForFuture
to fascinate, the morally grounded governance from the Chancellery anyway.
So much power makes you sensual.
And the lockdown for the climate is possible.
more on the subject
Transport: Greens want to ban public-private motorway projectsBy Gerald Traufetter
Chancellor candidate under fire: Baerbock taxed special payments
TV three-way battle of the Chancellor candidates: aggressive, serene, absent by Florian Gathmann, Kevin Hagen and Christian Teevs
Interestingly, because this is how you recognize their strategically expanded connectivity and learning ability, the green party leadership does not blindly follow suit.
Instead, they want to do both: climate protection above all else, but not another horse cure and not scare anyone off.
Gone are the days when the Greens proudly carried their bans in their banners.
I remember the year 2013, six weeks before the federal election: The then leader of the Greens, Renate Künast, renewed the electoral program demand for a BILD story that a meatless day ("veggie day") should become the "standard" in canteens .
The evening before the publication, which caused a lot of excitement, I met her at an event, and in a good mood she thanked her for allowing her to make her point again.
That wouldn't happen to Annalena Baerbock.
A fund for everyone and everything
The green election program (draft) mentions »transformation« a good 20 times, which indicates the extent of the renovation ambitions. Of course, there is even more frequent talk of "funds" for the pain-relieving accompaniment of these transformations. Such a "fund" should exist for the auto industry, for what will soon be industrial regions, for commuters, agriculture and the wilderness, for (startup) founders and whistleblowers. For the future and against heat waves and against the hostility to which scientists are exposed. There is also to be a »fund« for culture in this country, for the »urban development emergency«, EU local government funding and the United Nations climate program.
How much money should be in this fund and where it comes from is not specified in detail. Anything that is envisaged in terms of tax increases is likely to be insufficient or invalid for constitutional reasons. So I come to the conclusion: If the Greens deserve a stigma today, then it is not a
ban,
but
debt
. Chose does not pay off any other way.
In terms of election tactics, this is unfortunately very promising: As tax and debt payers, the Germans are much more tolerant than tormented drivers, home builders or pork neck steak eaters. The fact that they are usually both or more in personal union is one of the truths that can hardly be communicated even to those affected, which is why only weak resistance is to be expected from the citizens even against the most massive debt-making. Here, too, exactly the note with which the Constitutional Court recently demanded clarification of the climate protection expenditure for the years 2030 to 2050 applies. Not only unchecked global warming can unduly curtail the freedom of the future, unchecked debts can also do so once interest rates rise and they put the euro at risk.Should a green-led federal government nevertheless attempt to abolish the debt brake in its current form (this is what it says in the electoral program), then a sad circle will come full circle: In the past, electricity came from the socket with the Greens. Today the money comes from the printing press.
