The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Category: Articles

Must Dance and Have a Moustache

Thoughts on gay male culture as the Village People perform at the Trump inauguration.


20/01/2025

The Village People were absolutely not any kind of gay community project. Many of them weren’t gay, and this was a commercial venture—in the early 70s there existed a post-Stonewall gay market, largely male, who danced to disco in new commercial clubs and liked hearing songs that alluded to, if in a roundabout way, queer life. And so, the band produced an album called Cruisin’—gay slang for seeking casual sex in public places—which included their biggest hit, “YMCA”, a reference the famous sexual shenanigans at the titular chain of institutions in New York. George Chauncey’s classic history Gay New York refers, for example, to a “free for all” and “never ending sex” in the showers (this perhaps isn’t widely understood—a few years ago, visiting Stockport, where I grew up, I chanced on the local Pride parade where the Scouts marched past to the tune of “YMCA”).

Other tracks included “Macho Man”, at a time when a look featuring 501s and moustaches was huge in gay venues. The original recruiting advert for group members specified “Macho Types Wanted: Must Dance And Have A Moustache.” “Go West” referred to San Francisco as a “gay El Dorado”. The journey from New York to the west coast was undertaken by Harvey Milk among others, and the golden memory of pre-AIDS San Francisco is depicted in Armistead Maupin’s Tales of the City books. The repeated “Together!” of the lyrics references, I think, both personal relationships and a new-found sense of community—amid the nod-and-wink references and exploitation of the audience, there are moving bits of social history in the mix. “In the Navy” plays on tropes about horny sailors and on-board sex, with puns about seamen/semen and recruitment to “openings in the navy”.

All of this is tacky, sure. But gay male culture in the 70s, outside of New York and San Francisco, was cobbled together out of all kinds of tacky things. In 70s Britain, John Inman and Larry Grayson were on television. Gay bars were decorated (New Union in Manchester, I’m looking at you) with flock wallpaper and little reproductions of Michelangelo’s David. Disco tracks featured black divas singing of men they had lost (such as Phyllis Nelson’s “Don’t Stop the Train” in clubs where no actual black women were ever present. You can’t invent a subculture overnight, and all this allowed room for retreat and disavowal should it become necessary—it’s a statue by a respected artist, it’s a song about heterosexual love, the Village People are only joking.

The thought that the Village People were only joking, or a straight unwillingness to acknowledge what they were actually referring to ( for example, that a disco song could mention anal sex, even via a double entendre) led to confusion back in the day, as when the US Navy considered using “In the Navy” in recruitment adverts. And the space left open for ambiguity comes into play again now that Victor Willis, the last remaining member of the original group, is performing as part of the Trump inauguration and trying to disentangle “YMCA” from its status as (come at me, Willis’s lawyers!) a gay anthem. A wide streak of opportunism and an eye on the money were always big parts of Village People’s take on queer folk. During the election campaign, presumably thinking of their fanbase, they tried to stop Trump using “Macho Man”. But now that he’s won, “YMCA” is to be, well, straightwashed if that’s where there’s money to be made. The ambiguities of gay male enthusiasm for macho aesthetics return to haunt us as a celebration of hairy-chested hotness is used to praise Donald Trump. Fifty years on, you might think, we have unambiguous queer voices like Lil Nas X and Chappell Roan. But then you hear a censored version of “Call Me By Your Name” playing in Tesco, and questions about representation arise all over again.

AfD plans Deportation ticket for non-Germans

In the run up to the German elections, the AfD make their racist plans clear


19/01/2025

A massive 15,000 people traveled in 200 buses from all over Germany aiming to block a national conference of the far-right AfD in the Saxon town of Riesa on Saturday, January 11.  But two days earlier, a new hate campaign against migrants and refugees from the AfD had claimed public attention. Let’s review events by last week’s timeline.

On Thursday, January 9, Elon Musk had entered the fray. He had decided to influence the February 23 German Federal elections by supporting the AfD. So he had a 74-minute live chat with the party’s leader Alice Weidel. The AfD, which won 10.4% of the vote in the 2021 elections, is polling second in Germany this time, with 22% of the potential vote. The interview was rife with false and dangerous statements, covering topics from migration to National Socialism. In her typical right-wing and revisionist-of-facts fashion, Weidel dismissed pandemic-era mask measures as a “bluff and fraud”. Members of the party have often taken part in demonstrations of the so-called “Querdenker” movement against COVID-19 restrictions, alongside neo-Nazis. 

During the interview, Weidel claimed that Hitler was not right-wing but “communist and socialist” She portrayed her party as “libertarian and conservative” and “the only party that protects Jewish life in Germany.” This lie was challenged by the conservative Central Council of Jews in Germany. Musk’s collaboration with the AfD perfectly aligns with the party’s revisionist and inflammatory rhetoric.

On Saturday, January 11, anti-fascist demonstrators arrived early in Riesa to block all roads leading to the hall, delaying the conference by two hours. However the conference proceeded, aided by police using pepper spray, truncheons, dogs, horses, water cannons. All that had for more than a year become familiar to those demonstrators against the genocide in Gaza. They faced tactics of pushing, punching and kicking to clear the blockades. Party co-leader Tino Chrupalla called the demonstrators “terrorists” and thanked the police for their intervention. Why did the police apply these tactics? Ostensibly to ensure “protection of the fundamental rights of both sides.”

It’s worth noting that the AfD is being monitored by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution as a suspected right-wing extremist party. Saxony is one of three states where the party’s extremist nature has already been officially confirmed.

The conference chose Weidel to be the AfD’s candidate for chancellor. In her acceptance speech, she called for “remigration”. In right-wing and Nazi parlance this means the deportation of millions of people, including non-whites with German passports. It is a term that became notorious after a secret meeting between Nazi “activists” and AfD officials in Potsdam a year ago.

During the conference, a new flyer in the shape of a plane ticket was distributed among delegates. Titled a “deportation ticket,” it featured the AfD logo and was addressed to a “passenger: illegal immigrant.” The flight details were transparently xenophobic and racist: departure “From: Germany,” destination “Safe country of origin”. The passenger is to board at “Gate AfD” on 23 February, the day of the election, from “8 am to 6 pm”. Two sentences at the bottom of the “ticket” read: “Only remigration can save Germany” and “It’s nice at home too”. 

The 2025 flyer is almost an identical copy of 2011 and 2013 election flyers by another far-right party, the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) – which then changed its name to Die Heimat. In 2017, Germany’s Constitutional Court found that the NPD pursued unconstitutional goals in line with neo-Nazi ideology, but stopped short of banning the party.

The campaign bears an unsettling resemblance to the mock-up “one-way” “free train tickets to Jerusalem” for Jews that were distributed in public spaces across the German Reich during the 1920s and 1930s. Whether or not this historical reference was intentionally chosen or even known by the AfD, the striking similarity in political rhetoric and ideological patterns highlights a shared alignment in beliefs.

A QR code on the front of the flyer links to the website of the AfD branch in Karlsruhe, Baden-Württemberg. Marc Bernhard, a member of parliament for the AfD in Karlsruhe, has confirmed the party’s recent flyer distribution campaign. According to Bernhard, between 20,000 and 30,000 flyers were printed and distributed through election campaign stands and by dropping them into letterboxes. He emphasized, however, that there was no targeted search for letterboxes with foreign-sounding names during the distribution process.

On Monday, the Karlsruhe branch published an additional statement on its website, defending the flyer as “fully in line with the current legal situation and the Basic Law.” The reverse of the flyer outlines a xenophobic program titled “one-way economy”. This includes proposals such as “Humanitarian residence only as long as there is a reason for asylum”. History has a lot of examples of future developments of such ‘adequate’ reasons. The programme goes on to “Deportation of all persons obliged to leave the country”. This is explained as: “The demand to leave the country refers in particular to people who are in Germany illegally… such as the 1 million Syrian (former) civil war refugees in the country”. This rhetoric is not unique to the AfD nor to Germany. One day after Assad left Syria, a number of countries have already announced they will stop processing asylum applications. 

Most German political parties, including the CDU, SPD, Greens, and FDP, support deportations in various forms. For instance, CDU MP Carsten Linnemann recently called for deportations after just two criminal offenses. This is a low threshold taking into consideration that “offences” like using public transport without a ticket are still considered a crime in Germany.

The AfD’s flyer also called for the “reduction of false incentives”. This includes restricting unemployment benefits (“citizen’s money”) to German citizens, and denying residency rights to asylum seekers and a general call to “stop illegal immigration”. Additionally, it demands an end to “Islamisation,” perpetuating a long-standing and infamous trope in European (far-)right rhetoric. The flyer attempts to placate any potential public outrage by claiming that citizens would not be deported, asserting that the party’s demands were “completely legitimate and legally compliant.”While other political parties may publicly distance themselves from the AfD’s overt xenophobia, the underlying policies are often alarmingly similar. The AfD’s ability to openly express such views allows other parties to appear moderate by comparison, despite sharing overlapping agendas. Meanwhile, Karlsruhe criminal police have begun investigating the campaign for incitement to hatred, but given historical precedent, it is unlikely to lead to significant consequences.

Germany is Remilitarising, Again

Facing an Increasingly Rightwing Society and a Threat From the East, Politicians are Placing their Bets on a Militarised Germany


18/01/2025

December 18th was an odd day during election season, as Germany’s defence minister Boris Pistorius repeatedly heaped credit and praise on other parties. Responding to questions in the Bundestag, Pistorius thanked the Grüne and FDP several times, and gave a special thanks to the CDU for voting to support the government, despite being in opposition. Together, they passed a spending package for the German military worth over 20 billion euros. 

Speaking to the press, Pistorius made one thing clear: “This is not a topic for election campaigns.” He also told them that it marked “the highest sum that has ever been recorded” in Germany’s defence spending. The statement speaks for itself in print, but Pistorius said it in a tone full of self-congratulation.

The funding is going towards numerous different projects, although not all of them are transparent to the public. Among other things, the army will receive PULS missile systems, a rocket-firing truck used by the IDF to carry out the genocide in Gaza and made by the Israeli company Elbit Systems. For the air force, several different types of missiles have been ordered, including Patriot guided missiles and Iris-Ts. On top of that, the Bundeswehr will receive various types of digital security software and logistical structures.

The largest expenditures though, were for the German navy, which among other things will be receiving four U-boats to replace Germany’s aging stock, although these will take seven to eight years to be delivered. The emphasis on the navy points to Germany’s concerns in the North Sea, where it considers itself particularly vulnerable to Russian attacks on infrastructure. Late last year, Pistorius was quick to declare the cutting of two communications wires, one of which connected Germany to Finland, as an act of Russian sabotage. It came out several days later that it was likely a Chinese tanker ship dragging its anchor, despite Pistorius’ quick accusations.

The German government is also looking to increase the personnel in the Bundeswehr, which includes Germany’s standing army, navy and air force. Currently at around 180,000 soldiers, the plan is to increase to 203,000, although Pistorius said in the Bundestag that it will likely end up closer to 230,000. 

Is Conscription on the Horizon?

Not only is the number of active soldiers increasing, the government is also planning on sending a survey to German citizens of at least 18 years of age, inquiring into their willingness to serve in the military in times of war, as well as any relevant skills they may have. While men are required to fill out the form, women are allowed to as well, if they want to show sport. 

While the government states that this is not a reinstatement of mass conscription, which Germany abolished in 2011, it appears to be a clear step in that direction. 

For the most part, Germany’s political parties are all sounding a similar note regarding militarisation leading up to this election, with the exceptions of BSW and Die Linke. The CDU’s platform not only includes raising the number of personnel, but also increasing the number of public oaths and other forms of recognition for the military. They see 2% spending of GDP, as required by NATO, as the minimum goal. While this was to be expected, Robert Habeck of the Grüne’s declaration that Germany needs to nearly double its defence spending to 3.5% has turned some heads.

While Germany’s mainstream political parties stand behind this increased militarisation of both state and society, a poll from March 2024 hints that they need to be cautious not to overstep their militarisation push. Asking Germans whether or not they are in favour of reinstating Wehrpflicht (conscription), 52% stated they were in favour and 43% against. 

The numbers change noticeably with age: In the 60+ category, 59% of the population is in favour and 37% against, with similar numbers for 45-59 year olds. But the 18-29 year olds, who would mostly be the ones serving, are much less enthusiastic, with only 39% in favour and 59% against. Women in this age group are especially against, 30% in favour compared to 68% against, while young men are 46% in favour.

The same poll breaks support down along party lines, showing that SPD voters would support reinstating conscription by a slim margin, while CDU, AfD and (ironically) BSW voters support it by 67-68%. The poll shows Habeck to be playing with fire however, with only 37% of Grüne voters supporting conscription.

While it’s important to note that currently only the AfD are calling to reinstate the Wehrpflicht, the mixed numbers here show that the idea has limited popularity already (the CDU has already approved the idea internally in response to a members motion, although it’s not in their election programme). It may be another case of the AfD taking a controversial position which the other parties are then quick to copy. While most politicians are taking care to not bring the issue up for the time being, should the current pace of disillusionment in Germany continue a further shift in favour of militarisation in German society appears likely.

It is worth noting that this is a far cry from the situation leading up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, when Gerald Schröder made his opposition to the war a core part of his (notably successful) 2002 election campaign, and tried to talk the Americans out of it while in office. Die Grüne held a similar position at the time.

Ukraine has in many ways marked a shift for German political opinion, including in the 2014 invasion of Crimea, as journalist Franziska Augstein described back in 2015. It is perhaps unsurprising, then, that Putin’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine has now caused an even larger revival of German militarism among both politicians and populace.

A Rising Far-Right and A Strong German Military

The new funding programs and CDU’s proposals for public loyalty ceremonies take place in the context of a Bundeswehr with both a long and recent history of far-right extremism. In response to questions from Die Linke, the Defence Ministry released information last December showing that 2023 saw 205 extreme right-wing, racist or antisemitic incidents. These led to 62 soldiers getting fired for such infractions, such as using “heil Hitler” chants. Of those fired, 10 were officers. These overall numbers are a slight decrease from the previous year.

It is hard to imagine any good effects coming from a more militarised German state and society. With an increasingly right-wing youth, a stagnant economy and social services falling apart even before the CDU’s next round of austerity, drastically increasing spending in the Bundeswehr means military service could become the easiest way to access state support. Besides that, strengthening spending in institutions that serve both as recruitment grounds and weapons training for fascists is hardly a comforting thought. 

As the CDU are set to come to power, and the AfD seem to become more popular with every election, increasing the strength of the German military raises the obvious question of who will be leading it in 10 years time. It would not be the first time that a social democratic or conservative government paved the way for a dictatorship with military drills and wads of cash for tanks.

Photography Can Amplify Stories, Voices and Empower People

Interview with Margarita valdivieso Beltran about her anti-racism activism, photography, and work with refugees in Thuringen


17/01/2025

Hi, Margarita. Thanks for talking about us. Could we start by saying a little about who you are and what you do?

Hi Phil, thank you for having me. I am a Colombian visual artist. I lived in Germany for five years, I did a masters in media art & design and worked as a teacher and researcher for the faculty of visual communication at the Bauhaus University. During my time in Germany I was involved in various migrant movements and grass root organisations that work with civic education and human rights. My work delves into topics of political violence, aesthetics of power, anti-racism and migrant communities both in Colombia and Germany.

You have a long-term project about political violence called “Arder la casa“. Could you explain a little more about this?

Arder la casa explores the contingencies of violence in Colombia through my family history and my father’s exile. In 2015, years after finishing his term as mayor of a small town bordering Venezuela, my father crossed the Colombian border fleeing the political persecution he had been subjected to for decades. I remember that he disappeared on different occasions when I was still a child, but the fairy tales my parents told me justified his absence. In 2015, for the first time, I understood the fragmentation of my nuclear family as a consequence of the political conflict in Colombia. My father’s exile marked a turning point from which this project develops. With the images, I try to travel between the past, the present and the future, unveiling our history to reveal traces of violence, mythologies, family relationships and wounds. The project uses archives such as photos or newspaper clippings, paintings, analog photography, video and sculpture.

You have moved on to depicting racist violence in Thuringen. Why did you choose this subject? Is there a connection between violence in Thüringen and your earlier work in Colombia?

The topic has always been personal, I always had an uneasy feeling while living in Germany. At first it was something that I couldn’t name properly, some sort of inadequacy that I understood as part of my character; as if something was wrong with me, perhaps my culture or my personality. It quickly developed into discomfort. Talking to friends and sharing our experiences, I understood it had more to do with how white Germans and German society perceive me than with something wrong inside me. At some point, I felt that in Germany I couldn’t concentrate on making art, not with all the noise itching around my body. I got involved with different anti-racist initiatives that were amplified during the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020. I went to marches, did speeches, got connected with people having the same struggles.

At some point though I wanted to get back to photography, I had stopped taking pictures for two years. It was a sort of creative vacuum, highly connected with the place. I did an exercise, I wanted to portrait my friends in medium format. It was an excuse to make pictures again and it quickly transformed into a project that I thought could be interesting, to photograph and interview my friends to ask them about their experiences with racism in the city. While doing this I won a grant and it became a bigger project, a traveling exhibition that showed stories and pictures in different cities of Thuringia, anti-racism workshops and lots of conversations. From then on I have worked with such topics. 

What are the day-to-day experiences for refugees in Eastern Germany? How much support is available?

I guess this could be better answered by someone who has had the experience of living as a refugee and is active within the community. But in my opinion and having learned from my work, I think the experiences vary depending on where the person is living, wheter that person has family in the country, if they speak the language, whether they are BIPoc or white, where they come from, etc. In my experience working with refugees, I saw that refugees in Thuringen are isolated in facilities located in rural areas or small towns, where access to education, culture, language classes and society is difficult. Refugees living in the camps face lots of discrimination, the staff in the camps have faced countless legal complaints of discrimination, violence, racism and the facilities are often under scrutiny due to overpopulation, damages, improper living conditions… it is not an easy place to live and sometimes one could think such camps have certain traces of the camps in 1942.

How has Eastern Germany changed since the recent election results?

I left Germany at the end of 2023 after finishing this project on white supremacy in Thuringen. One of the reasons leading to my decision was noticing that the rise of the AFD wasn’t particular to one region or town in the East, but rather an expanding reality that gained power and fuel with time. It made me feel that there was no place for me to really feel at home, and it also made me feel drained and exhausted. I didn’t want to face such structures anymore.

Racism does not just come from the AfD. How are refugees and BIPoc people in Eastern Germany affected by structural racism?

Racism is a structural matter in Germany. Structural means that it is a logic embedded in society through policies, bureaucracy, ideology, education, etc. In the educational system, for example, discrimination occurs based on assumptions about the capacity and ability that children have to attend university.  According to research by the Open Society Justice Initiative: “Based on the testimonies of teachers, including majority German teachers, German language skills and religious instruction in school are often used as a proxy to segregate migrant children into separate classes and enable school officials to lure native German parents with ‘German language Guarantee classes.’ A recommendation for higher education in the case of students from ‘migration background’ will often be put in doubt against the premise: ‘The child comes from a family not invested in education’—a peculiar observation in a meritocracy”.

In my experience as a masters student and teacher for the Bauhaus University, I faced structural racism that had to do with language access and methodologies for my work. I did a program for media art and design that was offered in English; nonetheless, only a few of the classes for my program were taught in English, and when we demanded solutions, the administration decided to close the program without giving any answer to the students that were already taking classes. As a teacher I was confronted with administrators that were reluctant to help me as I did not speak German with them, and even when I was offered a contract for a teaching position, my visa took three months to be issued, while the staff from the migration office were extremely unhelpful and misleading. I felt that I had to beg for help, the whole process wore me out. Experiences like the ones described above lived by children in the school or by me in university have in common access to language, our migration background and the general sense of discrimination. Nonetheless, this is only the tip of the iceberg and one of the faces of structural racism.

You document not just anti-Black racism in Eastern Germany but also antisemitism. What antisemitism is being experienced and where is it coming from?

Although I haven’t worked with the jewish community as much as I would like, I documented the story of a refugee a Moroccan Jewish refugee. He has repeatedly been a target of antisemitic attacks by institutional workers in Thuringen. He came to Germany seeking the status of political refugee and was transferred from Hamburg to Suhl for a short period of time. While in Suhl, he experienced discriminatory treatment from the staff at the camp that, as he describes, began only when the staff learned that he spoke Hebrew and was Jew. On one occasion the staff member told him “Your place is the Holocaust, damn Jew.”  He filed a criminal complaint accompanied by Ezra, the organisation counselling the case. Ezra’s representative said that “The subsequent process was characterized by the reversal of roles between the perpetrator and the victim. A counter-complaint was filed for defamation and false accusation. The complaint against the facility manager was dismissed by the public prosecutor’s office due to insufficient suspicion. A summary penalty order and a fine were issued against the person seeking advice”. As with this complaint, many others have been dismissed by judges that don’t take them seriously. It shows you how structural racism suffuses the legal system in Germany. 

Many recent anti-racist activities, such as the attempt to block the AfD party conference in Essen, have been attended largely by White activists. What are the barriers to BIPoc people – who are the main victims of racist violence – getting involved in these campaigns? Do you think that the German anti-racist movement is inclusive enough? If not, what needs to be done?

I mean, inclusive of White people? The anti-racist movement in Germany was organised by Black Germans, migrants and other diaspora groups, and the allyship of white Germans has happened with time. There are many organisations and groups led by BIPocs that work with an anti-racist agenda. From civic education, art initiatives, to legal counselling and support, BIPoc led initiatives are present and have long-standing paths working with communities all over Germany. I don’t know the organising group against the AFD conference, but I believe that we all need to become anti-racist to be able to support anti-racist causes and have inclusivity within our circles.  Only knowing that racism happens is not enough to be an ally. White people need to get trained and have a lot of self-reflection time, attend workshops, listen to other voices and give space. One reading that I recommend to start this anti-racist path is How to be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X Kendi.

You are not a politician, you are a photographer. What do you think the role of photography is in countering the far right?

I think photography can amplify stories, voices and empower people. Photography shapes representation, and representation matters! Through visual stories we can put out more diverse and intersectional narratives, giving the public and the viewer alternatives to look at the world. We can challenge mainstream perspectives through visuality and counter narratives that are segregational or blind-sided; but it all depends on the photographer and their knowledge and awareness of the world. It takes some time to decolonize the gaze and a long training to learn to look in different ways.  It also is so incredibly important to learn to work with communities, collaborators or subjects. Being a photographer means having a great deal of responsibility, but also power. We hold power over the subjects and it is our duty to learn to navigate that power to create more balanced relationships in our work and to honour the subjects and their stories. 

Where can people view your photography and/or support your work?

People can follow my work at @margarita.v.beltran and www.margaritavbeltran.net, I am going to take this opportunity to say that I am currently selling some of my photographs from different projects to finance a trip to the VOGUE Festival in March 2025 where I will be showing my pictures as one of the selected artists. Write to me at: margarita.valdivieso@posteo.net to get more details. <3<3

Red Flag: Why Do You Never See German Politicians on the Bus?

White-collar corruption in the Bundestag makes a mockery of representative democracy that rewards Germany’s most venal individuals.


15/01/2025

I mostly get around Berlin on public transport, and I run into all kinds of people. But you know who you absolutely never meet on the train, bus, tram, or ferry? Members of the Bundestag. There is a simple explanation: politicians are, without exception, wealthy.

A member of the Bundestag (MdB) gets €11,227.20 per month. For comparison, the median income of full-time workers in Berlin is €3,806 — a parliamentarian gets three times as much. But that number is distorted, since over a third of Berlin workers have part-time positions, and almost 10% are unemployed. This means politicians are earning more like 4-5 times as much as a normal worker.

They get an additional €5,349,58 to set up an office in their district. But no one checks how this is spent — it can pay for rent or also crystal meth. They get to spend up to €25,874 per month hiring assistants. They get unlimited free travel on Deutsche Bahn (a €500 value), and flights are reimbursed. They get chauffeured around Berlin in big black limousines — which is why you never run into them on the bus.

Counting this stuff together, every MdB is getting closer to €20,000 per month. These are the “representatives of the people,” but every single one of them is among the top 1% of earners. That’s why the parliament costs around a billion euros. But we’re just getting started…

Legal Corruption

Besides representing the people — apparently not a very demanding job — MdBs are explicitly allowed to have second jobs as long as the parliament is “at the center” of their activity. They only have to make vague declarations about such income, but at least 37 MdBs earn over €100.000 per year — one even declared an extra income of €3.4 million!

Jens Spahn is a racist agitator and former health minister. Back in 2018, he said that the €416 from Bürgergeld (citizen’s benefit) are enough to live off. But how could he possibly know? At the time, he was earning €15,311 — 37 times as much. But he didn’t have to survive off his official salary. Spahn worked as a lobbyist for Big Pharma while he was on the Bundestag’s healthcare committee, and he acquired a villa worth €4-5 million in Berlin-Dahlem with the help of a mysterious loan.

In other words, elected representatives are cashing in while in office. Isn’t this the very definition of corruption? Yet this is all completely legal.

Illegal Corruption

Germans see their country as ninth least corrupt country in the world, with a score of 78 out of 100 on the Corruption Perceptions Index. Open any newspaper, and corruption is widespread and barely hidden. For a prominent example, take that of, fortunately deceased, imperialist gremlin Wolfgang Schäuble, who was caught taking an envelope with 100,000 German marks in cash from a weapons dealer. This barely made a dent in Schäuble’s career; he went on to be a minister and Bundestag president, and when he died, he was lauded as a great statesman.

Or look at current chancellor Scholz, who helped banks steal billions from public coffers and get away scot-free. Scholz has been stonewalling investigations, yet hasn’t faced any consequences.

This goes across the political spectrum — it’s why parties mostly don’t scandalize each other’s corruption. The far-right AfD, which rails against a corrupt establishment, probably has the biggest corruptions scandals, with illegal donations from far-right billionaires. 

Even More Legal Corruption

Occasionally, an MdB will get in trouble for collecting millions. Yet most corruption in Germany is legal. The social democrat Sigmar Gabriel, a former vice chancellor, was collecting €10,000 a month from Tönnies, a company running meat-packing plants with hyperexploited immigrant labor. Gabriel defended himself by reminding people he was no longer a politician — €10,000 might seem like a lot of money to most people, but “in this industry, that’s not a particularly high amount”

Indeed, Gabriel had numerous such contracts going. And this is how money gets funneled to politicians: they get huge payouts, but only after they’ve left the Bundestag. I doubt such deals are ever put in writing, but everyone understands how they work, it’s bribery with delayed gratification.

A retired politician can get millions every year serving as a “consultant” or a member of a company board, which means going to a resort for a couple of weekends a year and signing some papers. It’s a payout. Lenin wrote that in the democratic republic, corruption is “developed into an exceptional art.” And the Federal Republic of Germany is indeed quite a “developed” country.

This is one of many mechanisms that ensures that bourgeois democracy is not actually democratic. The people are allowed to vote for their representatives but whoever they elect automatically becomes a member of the 1%. Is it any wonder they tend to sympathize with landlords, with people who own apartment buildings, more than with those of us who rent apartments?

Workers’ Candidates

In this election, there are workers running for the Bundestag who reject this systematic corruption. The social worker Inés Heider and her comrades have promised that if elected, they will only take a nurse’s salary — which is close to the median, around €3,800. They would donate the difference — over €7,000 — to a strike fund to support other workers’ struggles.

This is one of many ways they are challenging the “common sense” of capitalist politics. A socialist election campaign is not about getting votes. Rather, it’s about helping working people understand that this system is designed to serve the capitalists, not for us. Demands against ingrained corruption are part of an anticapitalist program. 

Nathaniel has been publishing the column Red Flag about Berlin politics since 2020. It has a new home at The Left Berlin, where it will be published every Wednesday.