Promotion of constitutional parliamentarian capitalism
“Seeking a consensus implies the separation of political power with democratically not legitimised forces”, according to the FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG (September 6th, 1999) which really cannot be described as hostile to the industry or radically democratic. Within the next few weeks, the Bundestag will vote on the result of negotiations between the government and nuclear industry bosses. Their mostly passive voting behaviour will then give evidence of how serious parliamentarians take their mandate. Even with regard to the most important and basic questions of federal politics, Red-Green did not seek communication with neither the parliament nor the people living in Germany. Rather, their consensus partners were big companies or their lobby organisations. Surely these organisations that are not legitimised even according to bourgeois interpretations of democracy, had already before 1998 an influence that can hardly be overestimated. Ex-chancellor Kohl himself epitomised this version of democracy by taking the word of honour he had given to the industry (not to reveal the identity of money donators) more seriously than the one given to the Parliament (by the Constitution). This degeneration of capitalist parliamentarism to a constitutional parliamentarian capitalism was deliberately ignored by the Greens - which can really be seen as the logical consequence of the green chorus calling for more involvement in civil society. Favouring an informal, market-based democracy which can do very well without tiresome votes and with doors closed, Red-Green accepts representatives of the industry and paying lobbyists as negotiation partners with equal rights - possibly even without considerable payments.
More:
ilka.org sicher lesen? dann: https://www.ilka.org