FRANKFURT Political scientist Thomas Biebricher researches conservative parties. He would like the CDU to have a higher profile, but also to clearly distinguish itself from the AfD. After the state elections in East Germany, he expects “unorthodox government formations”.
From Sascha Zoske
It is unlikely that Hubert Aiwanger will ever speak at an anti-AfD rally. The deputy Bavarian Minister President has already stated that these “demonstrations against the right” are often “infiltrated by left-wing extremists”. The leader of the Free Voters, who is regularly accused of right-wing populism, would not be very credible as a speaker at such demonstrations, says Thomas Biebricher. He has obvious doubts that Aiwanger can still be located in the political sphere that the Frankfurt political scientist calls the centre-right.
Biebricher has been Heisenberg Professor of Political Theory, History of Ideas and Theories of Economics at Goethe University since 2022. His research interests include conservatism; he published a book on the subject in 2023. It is difficult to say whether the protests against the AfD are damaging it or driving even more supporters towards it, says the researcher, who was born in 1974. Nevertheless, he considers the gatherings to be an “important sign” that democratic forces can show their cohesion.
He also expressly welcomes CDU politicians at such events. He does not think much of the attempts by some left-wing organizers to exclude conservatives. Biebricher admits that the slogan “protesting against the right” is a generalization. However, it is well suited to mobilization. The danger of excluding people who consider themselves to be on the center right seems calculable to him. In his opinion, both right-wing and left-wing democrats should “jump over their own shadow” when it comes to standing together against extremists.
But how does Biebricher define the term “center-right”? Not in terms of positions on certain issues, but as a “place where moderate conservatism is at home”. Unlike right-wing authoritarianism, change is not categorically rejected there. Center-right politicians are sometimes even prepared to push for change in order to avoid harsh disruptions. As a result, they play an important role in society: they can also awaken understanding for necessary reforms in social strata that cannot be reached by left-wing politicians.
For Biebricher, the recently deceased Wolfgang Schäuble was a classic representative of the center-right. However, he also considers most of the current office-holders and elected representatives of the CDU and CSU to belong to this group, including their chairmen. Although the professor finds some of Friedrich Merz’s statements worthy of criticism, he “already believes that he has no sympathy for the AfD”. Merz and the other CDU/CSU politicians find themselves in a “strategic dilemma”: on the one hand, in order to win over voters, they have to work on the issues that score points with the right-wing authoritarians, while on the other hand they have to be careful to distance themselves from them. According to Biebricher, “robust empirical evidence” speaks for a stable firewall to the AfD: a look at Austria and Sweden, for example, shows that cooperation with far-right parties is almost always at the expense of traditional conservatives. However, strict demarcation also makes it impossible to draw more moderate AfD representatives into one’s own camp through cooperation.
For the upcoming state elections in eastern Germany, Biebricher believes this means: “There are only bad options.” For him, all-party governments to prevent AfD rule would be an “oath of disclosure in terms of democratic theory”: This would only confirm the right-wing authoritarians’ claim that the “system parties” have conspired against them. A possible toleration of CDU minority governments by the AfD would, in turn, put CDU leader Merz in an extremely difficult position; both the AfD and the Left are subject to incompatibility resolutions. There is still the possibility of entering into alliances with the new parties of Sahra Wagenknecht and Hans-Georg Maaßen, provided they run and make it into the state parliaments. Biebricher does not rule out a coalition between Wagenknecht’s BSW and the CDU in Saxony, for example, even if this would be a “very difficult step” for both parties. Either way, the political scientist is certain: “We will see unorthodox government formations.”
After all, the CDU is still in a position to provide chancellors and prime ministers as the strongest force. In other countries such as France and Italy, classic conservative parties have long since been pushed aside by right-wing populists, according to Biebricher, or they have become “radicalized to the core” like the Republicans in the USA. He does not believe it is very likely that parties such as the Rassemblement National or the Fratelli d’Italia will become deradicalized and occupy the centre-right in the party landscape: their supporters could see this as an adaptation to the “system” and turn away.
Biebricher believes that the CDU has an even greater responsibility, as its relative strength could make it a role model in Europe. According to the researcher, however, the party is not currently fulfilling this role sufficiently. Under Angela Merkel, the CDU has cleared conservative positions, “but nothing has grown back in terms of ideas”. What should these be? “That’s for the CDU to answer,” says Biebricher. But he does have two suggestions. Conservatives could criticize the “concentration in certain industries”, for example in the big data business. And as a Christian party, they could emphasize the “preservation of creation”. “The CDU has left that to the Greens for far too long.”
Andreas Rödder is another person who has given a lot of thought to the future of the conservatives. Last September, the Mainz historian resigned as chair of the CDU’s Basic Values Commission after one of his theses on how to deal with the AfD provoked sharp criticism: Rödder believes it is justifiable if CDU minority governments in eastern Germany are occasionally supported by the AfD.
Biebricher says he “respects and appreciates” Rödder. In the debate about what conservatism should look like, his Mainz colleague is one of the “most influential voices”. With his thoughts on the AfD, however, he had “galloped off the rails”. Biebricher also does not share Rödder’s opinion that the CDU should engage in a “culture war” with the left and the Greens. If, for example, the CDU/CSU uses harsh words to campaign against gender language, it runs the risk of becoming indistinguishable from the right-wing populists. Motions on this could also be formulated in such a way “that the AfD does not vote”.
Biebricher’s objection is also met with a bold thesis that Rödder formulated some time ago to the horror of many conservatives: The CDU/CSU should think about dropping the “C” in its party name, because in an increasingly de-Christianized society, it could be a barrier for non-Christians and “signal exclusivity where the CDU/CSU actually aims for integration.”
Biebricher, who says he often travels in CDU circles, does not believe in such a revolution. After all, the “C” sets standards. And it doesn’t take much imagination to visualize what kind of ordeal such a step would mean for the party. Biebricher sensed this when he once sat on a discussion podium with Rödder. “When it came to the ‘C’, the breathing rate in the audience immediately increased.”
By Sascha Zoske. From the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 30.01.2024, Hochschule und Forschung (Rhein-Main-Zeitung), page 6 © All rights reserved. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH, Frankfurt. Provided by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Archive