It’s one of those things with the traffic lights: if all the colors light up at the same time, there is either chaos or standstill. And in any case, “right before left” applies. It is no different at the political crossroads between the road to socio-ecological transformation and the market-liberal impasse. It must be surprising how, for example, the green philosopher Robert Habeck raves about the political traffic light, at which red, yellow and green should shine together into the future.
It is more likely that a traffic light coalition with the “big one” that we have behind us has one fatal commonality: The reform approaches in the red-green program, which are still present, should be squeezed into a compromise corset with the ideology of the FDP from the outset – together with the ineradicable dogma of loyalty to the coalition – which dangerously narrows the space for necessary changes. But isn’t there an alternative to the traffic light, especially since the remaining alternatives black-green-yellow or red-black would mean blockade and standstill? That is a good argument – but only as long as another possibility is excluded: the minority government.
This variant is subject to a strange taboo in Germany. It is often said that such a large and important power needs “stability”, that is, majority governments. But what kind of stability is that when a government can be safe for four years in front of the parliament, which it was supposed to control? Small changes to this or that law in the committee are still possible. But in principle, nodding off is compulsory.
In contrast, a minority government would of course mean more unpredictability. You would first have to seek the majorities for laws, which is generally considered unreasonable in this country, but actually belongs to the core elements of parliamentary democracies. You’d have to compromise, sure. But not in coalition agreements that are written before the Chancellor is even elected. But in each specific case and depending on the content with different parts of the opposition.
That is not easy, and it would be even more difficult in the new Bundestag. Because for Red-Green, the most conceivable minority government, the votes of the weakened Left Party would not be enough on issues such as minimum wages or rent caps.
More complicated but livelier
But that’s the joke of minority governments: Anyone who already has majorities for a common policy can also form a government alliance right away (which Olaf Scholz would not have done with the Left Party, but that’s another topic). Or vice versa: The new confusion of the party system, in which no “camp” has a majority any more, makes the idea of a minority government really suggestive. A Chancellor Olaf Scholz (who, by the way, could be elected in the third parliamentary round with a simple majority) would have to seek the compromise with parts of the FDP or CDU / CSU – but not in a coalition agreement previously carved in stone, but in each case very specifically . This would be all the easier as the starting point for these compromises would be the consistent program of a government made up of “related” parties. However, this model has another major advantage: the critics’ argument about stability is directed against themselves.
Why this? Because the supposed stability of majority governments is actually threatening to undermine the foundations of the parliamentary system. A Bundestag that debates vigorously, but mostly about results that have already been determined in advance – that is a steep blueprint for anyone who doubts the effectiveness of democratic control in this system or despises it from the outset (often accompanied by absurd conspiracy myths).
Parliamentarism has an urgent need to become more alive. He must learn again to make decisions on the basis of open debate instead of the instructions of an executive branch influenced by lobbies and interests. He must set himself the task of dealing with critical developments or impulses from civil society without fear of “changing majorities”. In short, he must democratize himself. If that does not happen and if the political staff persists in a lack of movement that is misunderstood as “stability”, the already gaping “representation gap” will widen and the acceptance of parliamentary decisions will continue to decline – a template for right-wing extremists who want just that.
Yes, minority governments are complicated. But they might be a milestone on the way to a really stable, because living, democracy.
.