The German government wants to throw two opposition parties out of parliament

A revolution took place in Germany in March. Yet neither in Germany nor in Europe was it truly realized - because in Germany, revolutions are not made in the streets but in Prussian offices. This was already the case with the previous, failed March revolution in 1848. Revolutions triggered from above, on the other hand, are far more successful - and so it was with the present one.

On 17 March, Germany carried out what was possibly the most significant change in electoral law in the post-war period. It was also especially remarkable because a government with an absolute majority could thus eliminate two opposition parties, at least in the medium term. The left-wing coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals is pushing through a law that will harm one party in particular - the “Christian Social Union” (CSU) from Bavaria, but which will also affect the post-communist “Die Linke”.

More precisely, deletion of the so-called "basic mandate clause" could be the CSU's undoing. In Germany, there are currently two modes of a party getting into the Bundestag. The first variant requires the party to receive 5 per cent of the total votes. The second variant - and this is where the basic mandate clause comes into play - requires winning a direct mandate in at least three constituencies. The party then receives the number of seats in the parliament that it would be entitled to according to the percentage of the total votes it has achieved - even if it has not reached 5 per cent.

The process is particularly significant because one party is currently benefiting from this rule. It is the post-communist party “Die Linke” (“The Left”). In the GDR, it was the united party of the socialist state, which operated under the name SED. It missed the 5 per cent hurdle in the last Bundestag election in autumn 2021, but is still in the Bundestag because it won three direct mandates. Under the new rules, it would no longer sit in parliament.

One may now stand by the history and ideology of this party as one likes. Yet the fact that an incumbent government is pushing through a law whose open intention is to eliminate a left-wing rival party would perhaps be expected in a South American banana republic or an authoritarian state built on the post-Soviet model, but not in a Central European country that belongs to the European Union. If Rome, Warsaw or Budapest had passed a similar law, Germany would be on Brussels' doorstep within the hour to set up a commission of enquiry and threaten sanctions.

The real perfidy of the new electoral law, however, lies in the consequences for the aforementioned CSU and thus for the entire political system of the Federal Republic. Unlike the “Left”, the CSU won significantly more than just three direct mandates, as the party, which has essentially regional roots, is particularly strong in Bavaria. Of the 46 Bavarian direct mandates, the CSU won 45. While in some of Germany's big cities even the candidates with the most votes achieve 20 to 30 per cent only, this is quite different for the Christian Socialists: their representatives achieve impressive results especially in the countryside.

In any correctly functioning electoral system, it should therefore be clear that these directly elected Bavarian representatives should enter the national parliament. But not so in Germany, according to the electoral law passed on 17 March. If the CSU does not achieve 5 per cent at the federal level, it is not entitled to any mandates. Even if its direct candidate were to win with an absolute majority in every Bavarian constituency.

The new electoral law thus harms the parties of the political right much more than those of the left. This is because the CSU is only present in Bavaria and must thus become so strong in Bavaria that it wins 5 per cent of the total votes in the whole of the Federal Republic if it wants to be present in Berlin. Now, Bavaria is a comparatively large federal state, and such a thing is indeed possible. In the past, the CSU was always above the 5 percent hurdle. But with the change in the party system and the voting behaviour of the population, this is no longer so certain. In the 2021 federal election, the CSU got a total of 5.2 per cent. The next election is therefore a nail-biter.

If the CSU were to not make it to the next Bundestag, this would be a seismic shift in the German party system. Not only would millions of voters suddenly be no longer represented. It would also imply a strategic shift to the left, as the CSU is anchored in a common parliamentary group with the CDU in the Bundestag, and as there has been an agreement since the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany that the CSU will not contest outside Bavaria and the CDU will never contest inside Bavaria.

The strength of the CSU has often ensured the Union's strategic superiority over the Social Democrats in parliament. By being stronger, the CDU/CSU faction was able to win a majority even while in the grand coalition of CDU/CSU and SPD, so that the chancellor was elected from their ranks. If the CSU were to disappear in the future, the long-term perspective would be that the SPD could take the Union on the leash and provide the chancellor. Due to its own lack of strength, the CDU, if it wanted to govern, would be forced into humiliating cohabitation with left-wing parties. Elimination of the CSU means amputation of the CDU.

The federal government has praised its own reform in the highest terms. After all, it would reduce the size of parliament. Unfortunately, since the left rarely has a sense of irony, it may not have realised how right it was. It could have had two opposition parties banned immediately to achieve the same result. The parliamentary debate was dominated by the call for the CSU to put aside its egoism and bow to Germany's needs. Giving up its own existence as a service to the new Germany.

The AfD, which claims to be the only right-wing or conservative party in parliament, abstained from the vote. It also did not take the floor with speeches, but only asked two follow-up questions. On the one hand, this had to do with the fact that the new electoral law reform originally came from their ideas, even if the abolition of the basic mandate clause was an invention of the ruling coalition. On the other hand, it hopes to benefit if two rival parties leave parliament. In this respect, the "Alternative" has completely adopted the party spirit of what it calls the "old parties".

However, the AfD cannot hope to win the conservative votes of the Bavarians. It is too “deutschnational” (German-national) for that, which deeply contradicts Bavarian regional self-confidence. Accordingly, the AfD is less likely to benefit from the loss of the CSU than from the loss of the Left Party, which could indeed bind many East German areas to itself in the long term, as in the territory of the former GDR it is in direct competition with the post-communists, both adopting a stance of "total opposition" against the political establishment and of advocates of the East.

Once again, the handling of the case is characteristic of this unique event in West German history. The federal government had removed the basic mandate clause from the Electoral Law Act only four days before the vote. Opposition against this reform came from the concerned parties only, not any others: only the CSU and the Left Party want to take the matter to the Constitutional Court. The media noticed the historic scale, but were apparently not bothered by it. There were no public disturbances or protests - at least no demonstrations. So there can be no talk of an outcry. Just one week after the adoption, Germany was, once again, as quiet as a graveyard. Such are the conditions in a republic where revolutions are traditionally decreed from above…