The Struggle for German Identity

Germany’s second strongest party, the AfD, debates ethnic vs. national identity, showing the struggle over German identity is unresolved.

For centuries, Germany's history has forced the country to keep its doors open to naturalization and integration. The country has repeatedly succeeded in integrating different ethnic groups. Initially, they were marginalized, then integrated, and finally absorbed into the German identity. This was the case with the German-French, the German-Slavs, the German-Jews, and other ethnic groups.

From today's perspective, as the right wing would put it, these were “culturally similar groups.” But just look at what people thought only 100 or 200 years ago about the “Ziegelböhm” in Vienna, the Slavs, the Catholics, or the Protestants in the various German-speaking regions—not to mention the Jews, who were only given a chance to integrate at a late stage. They were not seen as “culturally similar.” And yet today they all belong.

Since the French Revolution, the modern state has legally equalized all differences within its population. As soon as you have the respective national passport, you have the same rights and obligations. There are no longer any classes, no nobility, no king, no princes, and no feudal system. There are no longer any differences between ethnic Germans and people with a migrant background and a German passport. Anyone who has the passport is German to the state, regardless of their ethnic or economic background. This is the foundation of the modern state: All citizens are equal before the law, regardless of their origin, wealth, or status, and no legal distinctions may be made between them, not even between ethnic Germans and naturalized Germans with a migrant background.

AfD questions the foundations of the modern state

For centuries, Germany has been asking itself who belongs and who does not. In this regard, the country is currently experiencing a debate initiated by AfD member of parliament Maximilian Krah. Unlike many other AfD representatives, Krah wants the party to stop distinguishing between the citizens of the state and the ethnic population. Why? According to Krah, large sections of the AfD are questioning the modern state. Their concept of remigration is aimed primarily at non-ethnic Germans with German passports. In doing so, the AfD is beginning to distinguish between non-ethnic Germans and ethnic Germans. The state must therefore take all possible measures against the right wing, because it is making a distinction between citizens, which is unconstitutional.

What makes Krah's idea dangerous is that he is shrewd and much more skilled than his opponents in the AfD. He wants to implement the remigration concept on real political grounds without questioning the foundations of the modern state. Krah's plan is to first close the borders and no longer allow migration. In a second step, criminals would be deported. In a third step, Krah accepts Germany's ethnic diversity for realpolitik reasons and wants to use it to the advantage of ethnic Germans. Since ethnic Germans make up over 70 percent of the population, they enjoy political hegemony in the state, which gives them enough power to prevent the growth of naturalized migrants.

Krah's approach coincides with the ideas of radical AfD representatives. They want to halt the growth of non-ethnic Germans by making the hurdles to citizenship so high in the final step that they are insurmountable. Since no new naturalized Germans are being added and the birth rates of naturalized Germans are converging with those of ethnic Germans, the number of naturalized Germans with a migrant background will decline from decade to decade until eventually only ethnic Germans remain. Krah's realpolitik approach is significantly more dangerous and insidious, as it may appear moderate in the eyes of conservative circles.

The CDU will decide Germany's new order

The key to implementing this idea lies not with the AfD, but with the CDU.

History shows that conservatives give the extreme fringes, depending on who they align themselves with, the power to fundamentally shape the state. In their study “How Democracies Die,” political scientists Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky examine how democracies have changed over the last 200 years. Their conclusion: conservatives have been the deciding factor – depending on whether they sided with the extreme left or the extreme right. For example, Hitler would never have gotten so far without the fragmentation of the conservatives in the Weimar Republic and their parliamentary support.

If the recent history of the last 30 years serves as a guide, the AfD will sooner or later come to power. Germany today finds itself in a political situation similar to that of Austria in the 2000s. At that time, right-wing populists came to power for the first time through a coalition with the conservatives. This happened because the established parties—mostly a coalition of conservatives and social democrats—failed to solve the country's structural problems. Social and economic problems ensued, and eventually, from election to election, the population became increasingly open to the extreme parties.

Germany's political order is in turmoil

The current grand coalition is the last chance for far-reaching policy without the AfD. But it does not look as if the CDU and SPD will succeed in implementing reforms. If the government fails, a coalition between the CDU and the AfD is likely.

The political fringes in Germany have reached a level of strength that the established parties have so far been unable to contain. In other words, the political order in Germany has long been in a state of flux. The main responsibility for this lies with the CDU, which has provided most of the chancellors and is responsible for the greatest strategic disaster in post-war history by allowing the fringes to grow and flourish. While the extreme left and the AfD each have a clear vision of what the social order in Germany should look like in the future, the CDU has so far failed to provide answers to the big questions of our time – in economic policy as well as in security and foreign policy.

The party has forgotten how to fight for its principles and sees the abyss not as a call to assert its principles and overcome its political irrelevance, but as an opportunity to save itself for one legislative period by doing as little as possible, or preferably nothing at all. That is the essence of the decline of the CDU elite. It has become arbitrary, arrogant, and lacking in strategy, while the Greens and the AfD have upgraded their intellectual capabilities. In between, the CDU is being crushed.

Where this leads

If the CDU suffers the same fate as the conservatives in Austria, today's Germany will change radically. The conservatives in Austria have long since abandoned their ideals; their program is almost identical to that of the right-wing populists. Without giving any thought to the nature of citizenship, they have amended the citizenship law. In Austria today, anyone who has received a parking ticket, for example, can no longer become a citizen. Naturalization has become an insurmountable hurdle for most people.

The ethnic principle of the right-wing populists has prevailed because the conservatives have lost their compass for statehood, their principles, and their political skills. A similar fate also threatens Germany. The CDU has long since left the battle over the nation's identity to others.

Foto credit: Maheshkumar Painam