An Evaluation of the Left Party in Germany
Retrieved From the following Web
Rivalry between moderate and radical currents
The ideological classification of the Left Party is controversial. Some academic and journalistic observers continue to regard the party as extremist and see its commitment to the constitution and democracy as primarily instrumental. Others emphasize that the Left is primarily concerned with overcoming the capitalist economic order, which is not a mandatory component of the democratic constitutional state and parliamentary system (Pfahl-Traughber 2013: 548 ff.). The ambiguity stems from the party’s mixed ideological situation, in which moderate and radical currents rival each other. The former do not want to eliminate the capitalist system in general, but only its “neoliberal” excesses. Such a reform, which aims to regulate market forces more strongly and redistribute the wealth generated, is certainly possible within the framework of existing democratic institutions. Radical currents in the party, on the other hand, see liberal democracy as a guarantor and stabilizer of the capitalist system. Their goal is the social-revolutionary overcoming of the political and economic order in the sense of a comprehensive social democratization. Within these radical currents, some associations in the party are regarded as “openly extremist” by the constitution protection authorities and are mentioned in the constitution protection reports.
The rapid succession of programs adopted since 1990 is symptomatic of the ideological dispute. While the principles established at the time of reunification were still determined by confidence in the newly introduced market economy, the anti-capitalist critique of domination was revived in the Berlin program of 1993.
The rise of the PDS to the status of a people’s party, which made it a shaping force in the East German states, subsequently gave the reformers a tailwind.
The high point of this development was the Chemnitz Program adopted in 2003, which professed freedom as the “reference point of socialist politics” and weakened the party’s rigorous positions on the property issue.
State associations such as Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania went even further in their “de-demonization” of capitalism (Jesse / Lang 2012: 279 ff.).
The current basic programme, which was adopted at the Erfurt party conference in 2011 after a long struggle, reflects the radicalization that has occurred since the merger with the Western Left.
In Marxist terms, the capitalist order is once again denounced as a “system of exploitation” and blamed for the “crises of civilization”. Real democracy could only exist under socialist auspices. The prerequisite for this was the overcoming of existing property relations and state control of the economy. Services of general interest, social infrastructure, financial institutions and the energy industry belonged in public hands and had to be democratically controlled (Neu 2018: 397 f.).
Social, tax and environmental policy
If the anti-capitalist positions are in the continuity of the former PDS (The party was reestablished with the name Party of Democratic Socialism) , the demands of the Left in social and tax policy also bear the hallmarks of the trade union-oriented representatives from the West German regional associations. They include a gradual reduction in weekly working hours, the reversal of the “neoliberal” social and labor market reforms introduced since 2002, a significant increase in the statutory minimum wage and extensive public investment in education and infrastructure. These measures are to be financed from additional government revenue through fairer taxation (reintroduction of wealth tax, a significant increase in inheritance tax and the top income tax rate as well as higher corporation and capital taxes).
Ecology
In addition to the social issue, the ecological issue plays a major role in the program. The positions of the Left now appear more resolute than those of the Greens because they rely on direct state intervention and are closely linked to the goal of comprehensive social democratization. The preservation of the natural foundations of life thus becomes a further area of their criticism of capitalism. There is agreement within the party that climate protection and social justice goals must not be set against each other. Remaining differences of emphasis are more of a semantic nature and are reduced to whether one should speak of a “New Green Deal” or rather of “eco-socialism”, similar to the Greens.
For a long time, the economic and social policy positions formed the “brand essence” of the Left, with which it wanted to set itself apart from the SPD in particular, but with its own course corrections, the programmatic differences between the two parties are becoming increasingly blurred. The same applies to ecology.
Because the Social Democrats and the Greens are aiming in the same direction with their reform efforts, the Left party is less and less able to make it clear why it is actually still needed as the third force on the left. Party researchers see this as the main reason for the recent loss of votes (Olsen / Hansen 2022).
Foreign and security policy
In contrast, the party can claim unique programmatic characteristics in foreign and security policy, where it consistently advocates the principle of non-violence as an “internationalist peace party”. The party rejects military operations by the Bundeswehr, even under a UN mandate. The Left Party calls for Germany to withdraw from the military part of NATO.
This should be dissolved in the long term and replaced by a collective security system including Russia.
The party would like to reallocate the defense budget to a civilian aid corps for humanitarian measures and disaster control. At international level, it calls for a reform of UN institutions and increased development cooperation.
Migration policy
When it comes to refugee policy, the Left Party is even more liberal than the Greens. This is particularly popular with supporters when it comes to the war-related causes of the crisis: this is where the party can play on the anti-militarist, anti-capitalist and anti-American positions of its ideology. When it comes to the reception and integration of immigrants, however, there is a mental and substantive distance to the party’s own voters, especially in eastern Germany, many of whom have defected to the AfD (Far Right Populist Party in Germany) since 2014.
Parts of the Left party are therefore questioning the official course. Wagenknecht and Lafontaine in particular have come out as critics. Because their call for a more restrictive immigration policy is based not only on distribution policy but also on cultural arguments, representatives of the majority line accuse them of being close to right-wing populist positions.
Democracy and the rule of law
Where the left advocates democracy and the rule of law, the focus is usually on the economy and society. It finds it difficult to unconditionally recognize the values of the Basic Law and the institutions of the liberal democratic state. Symptomatic of this is its devaluation of individual freedom rights as merely “formal” – in contrast to the more comprehensively understood, substantial freedom that can only exist in a society without exploitation and oppression. It is partly due to the party’s oppositional self-image that it advocates the strengthening of parliamentary rights and the introduction or expansion of direct democratic procedures within the political system. It also advocates better democratic control of the judiciary, the security services and the traditional and digital media in order to prevent the accumulation of power in the state and society.
The Left’s criticism of the existing democratic constitutional state is reflected in its positions on the politics of the past (Jesse / Lang 2012: 285 ff.). On the one hand, it clearly distances itself from the Marxist-Leninist ideology and dictatorial rule of the real socialist systems. On the other hand, however, it avoids referring to the GDR in general terms as an “unjust state” and consciously places herself in the social revolutionary tradition of Rosa Luxemburg, for whom freedom and pluralism were only possible within the socialist order.
Critics also see this as an attempt to morally exonerate communism, which is further reinforced by the left’s strongly emphasized anti-fascism and its resolute opposition to the USA – as the dominant power of capitalism.
The determined partisanship for Russia must also be seen against this background. Although the successor state of the Soviet Union is far removed from the ideology of the left in terms of the autocratic nature of its system of rule, the left has always taken a placatory stance towards the accusations made against Russia – from the annexation of Crimea and the first Ukraine crisis to Russia’s involvement in the war in Syria and the persecution of dissident opposition – while it does not hide its clear criticism of other dictators or authoritarian regimes (such as Turkey), including the course of the German government.
Even after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the party is still struggling to correct its course and come to terms with its own mistakes. In its declaration adopted at the Erfurt party conference in 2022, it condemns this as a criminal war of aggression that cannot be justified by anything. At the same time, however, it rejects arms deliveries to Ukraine and a strengthening of Germany’s and NATO’s defense capabilities and instead calls for a return to diplomacy and negotiated solutions in order to avoid bowing to military logic.
It supports the sanctions against Moscow insofar as they affect the oligarchs and the military-industrial complex, but not where they would have negative consequences for the local population – as in the case of a gas embargo.