What can happen in four years. After the last election, there was a majority left of the center and a courageous Social Democratic party leadership could have seized the agenda of action and formed a government with the Greens and the Left, which would come to a standstill and give fresh impetus, especially in Europe,
Angela Merkel would have been forced into a minority government (discussed here  four years ago) and could change politics from the opposition. Hare-footed as one was, but rather chose the path of least resistance, went into a great coalition, and let infinitely much happen that contradicted fundamental social-democratic values and goals.
Social Democrats: Profiling becomes difficult
And today, the Social Democrats are standing in front of a shard and that even though the CDU/CSU, its main opponent, has achieved the weakest result of recent history. One wonders just how much of the “Frei bier” has had to flow at the Willi-Brandt-Haus last Sunday before 6 pm, to induce the comrades, present to cheer at the chairman’s speech.
The SPD has now lost all reasonable political options, and at least the party leadership has recognized this. Apart from that, they will continue as far as ever, because to put opposition without having really an alternative political concept will make the profile of the mixture store of a Jamaican coalition still more difficult than before.
The most nonsensical saying of the election evening was the formula repeatedly repeated by every Social Democrat: “We win together and we lose together.” Imagine this in the relegation battle of a football team, because that means that no one is willing to take responsibility for the debacle.
That implies implicitly that we are not changing anything because at the outset, there was only one figure at the top, but not a personality who would ever have taken on a material responsibility for a well-designed program. Jeremy Corbyn would have had to resign if he had lost the election because he was the one who gave the British Social Democrats a new program. Martin Schulz has not given anything, so he cannot and will not take it.
The new coalition: an act of violence that nobody can wish for.
Angela Merkel was infinitely tired and frustrated in the round of top candidates on Sunday evening. She, too, should have had to retire yesterday because – and she did it herself in the round – everything that now comes is no longer properly described with the famous “troubles of the plain”.
It should form a coalition with the second and the very last one, as it stands, in the sense of the elective test stones of Macroscopy (here again the last state). This is not only materially difficult, but especially in the face of the chairman of the Liberals, who is inflated with an immeasurably hot air, an act of violence that cannot be desired.
Refugees’ question about Germany’s destiny
And this in a society that has shown particularly in this election campaign that it has completely lost the measure of the importance of things. Not only in the discussion of Merkel and Schulz, but in almost all medially staged campaign contributions, the refugee question was highly stylized as a question of Germany’s fate, which offered the AfD a wonderful breeding ground for its national vulture.
I do not know how often the Chancellor has already answered the question of her refugee decision in 2015, but when she heard yesterday that the newly elected parliament has little else in mind than a legal review of many decisions of the past years, she certainly asked herself if there was not a price that is too high for her.
It was no wonder, then, that Angela Merkel had in fact the greatest deal with Katja Kipping from the left who lamented exactly this wrong weight of the election campaign and urged the discussion of urgent questions.
Social issues, inequality and society, poverty and annuity, a weakening of infrastructure, a lack of public investment, the deplorable state of Europe, had to abandon all because German journalism, and the public media, had to deal with the issue of refugees in an unprecedented way everything else.
I do not even believe that there is an explicit right-wing attitude in most of them (people like Strunz from Sat 1, of course, are excluded), but the issue is easy to grasp by any journalist, the questions are obvious and the opposites between the parties are easy to reveal. Why should you consider complicated topics such as European economic and financial policy?
Translated from german