Jamaica on the Spree?

This morning's Boston Globe reports on a chaotic situation in Germany resulting from the inconclusive election:

The euro dropped in value, newspapers predicted chaos, and Machiavellian schemes to control Germany were reportedly being hatched in political backrooms.With two bitter opponents proclaiming themselves rightful leaders after Sunday's parliamentary vote, the country yesterday confronted the prospect of stalemate.The two-term chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder, asserted that his left-centrist Social Democratic Party was the true winner, though it finished second by a percentage point.His conservative rival, Angela Merkel, said her Christian Democratic Union had won, despite losing a big lead in the polls and scoring the narrowest of victories.''Who will rule Germany now?" said the top-selling newspaper Bild. ''Are new elections the only way out of this chaotic result?"

It is interesting that the Green Party - written off as inconsequential in the run-up to the election - has emerged as the pivotal group.  Unlike the Free Democrats - who peeled off voters from the CDU/CSU - and the Linkspartei - who attracted disaffected voters of the SPD - the Greens remained relatively intact, its base was loyal.  It has been difficult for me to imagine the Greens joining a "Jamaican" coalition with the FDP and CDU/CSU:  the Green values would seem to be diametrically opposed to the dogmatic neo-liberalism of Black-Yellow.  But Joachim Raschke makes a very persuasive case in today's taz:

Rot-Grün ist auf dem Feld der Ökonomie gescheitert, Schwarz-Gelb kann nicht gegen eine rot-grüne Wertegesellschaft anregieren. Was die skeptisch gewordene Gesellschaft an ökonomischer Kompetenzzuschreibung und Erwartung überhaupt noch aufbringt, richtet sich fast ausschließlich auf die bürgerlichen Parteien. Die Gesellschaft will nach Jahren der Stagnation weitere Impulse wirtschaftlicher Dynamisierung, auf der Angebots- wie auf der Nachfrageseite. Aber die Gesellschaft ist nicht so durchökonomisiert, wie es sich die bürgerlichen Parteien und vor allem die FDP vorstellen. Die Gesellschaft hat hohe Erwartungen an soziale Gerechtigkeit und Solidarität (für eine deutliche Mehrheit wichtiger als "Leistung") und sie will eine tolerante, offene und - wenn es sie nicht zu viel kostet - ökologische Lebensweise. Immer war der Zweifel, ob die SPD dieses breite rot-grüne Werteprofil in eine große Koalition wirklich einbrächte oder nicht doch die ökologischen Interessen zugunsten einer harten Industriepolitik und die bürgerrechtlichen Werte zugunsten eines starken Staates beiseite schieben würde.

Raschke has hit on something here.  The voting results show that the German voters were torn between a desire for more economic dynamism but also a deep-seated belief in social justice.  The Green party has an historic chance to mediate the values of social justice in a ruling coalition that is focused solely on economic issues.  The Green party could have exponentially more influence in a Black-Yellow-Green coalition than if they join the opposition.  Raschke asks "can the Greens jump over their own shadow?"  At least one blogger - Wolfgang Lünenbürger-Reidenbach over at Wahlblog - has endorsed this position.

Comments

[Linette]

I think German/European leftists would to well to familiarize themselves with the arguments in this article: "Bush's Taxing Stupidity."

An excerpt:

"Try to listen carefully, George: you need to RAISE taxes if you want to stimulate the economy, not cut them. How can this be true? It's very simple, actually. It all depends on whose taxes you are raising/lowering."

"If you raise the income tax rates of rich people, the predictable result is an increase in aggregate spending, greater economic growth, and lower unemployment. This is because such a tax hike ultimately takes money that would have been saved [by rich people] and spends it, instead. That creates jobs. Always remember, all jobs in the economy owe their existence to the spending of others (consumers, businesses, or the government)."

"The only reason why we ever have any level of unemployment in the economy is because too much saving is taking place. The only reason why recessions ever occur is because there is a decrease in spending. Sales drop. People are laid off. Why does spending drop? Because some people---who have a choice to either spend or save their money---decide to not spend (i.e., save)."

"If your country has an unemployment problem, it can be eliminated by increasing the amount of taxes that are collected from the wealthiest members of society. This is because large amounts of the money that they would be handing over to the government would have been saved by them otherwise. When you take money that would have been saved and spend it, it causes an increase in sales and that leads directly to more hiring by businesses."

"If the government were to increase the taxes of average folk, it wouldn't have the same positive effect on the economy. This is because the increase in the government's spending would be offset by the decrease in consumers' spending. Because spending is spending, this means that it would have neither a positive nor a negative effect on total spending in the economy. It is only when you increase the taxes of rich people that increasing taxes will stimulate the economy and create jobs."

"In spite of all the Wall Street propaganda you've heard to the contrary, America does not suffer from inadequate savings. Remember, any time your economy is suffering from any level of unemployment, it is because too much saving (by rich people) is taking place. They are the ones who can afford to give up some of their excess savings for the good of their country. (Instead of saving $5,000,000 this year, see if you can get by with only an additional $500,000 in savings.)"

"More spending, less saving by the Uber-Rich. That's how you fix your country's economy when people need jobs."

Schroeder needs to RAISE TAXES on the wealthy to eliminate unemployment, not cut spending!

[Wolfgang Lünenbürger-Reidenbach]

Besides that, it is interesting, that members of the Green Party are beginning some discussion about "Jamaican" coalitions. And even some of the strong left members think, it could be smart.
I don't think, it will come up with this coalition, because FDP and CDU will not be able to "jump over their own shadow". They would have to leave too many of their policies...
For some discussions from inside the Green Party take a look at my blog (e.g. http://luebue.blogspot.com/2005/09/jamaika.html)