Steinmeier's last unity speech: An appeal to defend democracy

If a Federal President finds it necessary to defend democracy on German Unity Day, the situation is serious. You couldn't help but get this impression when Frank-Walter Steinmeier took stock in his combative speech at the ceremony in Bremen - which currently holds the presidency of the Federal Council - on Saturday.

“We are currently not living in the world of confidence and hope from which we come,” said the Federal President, who turned 70 this year. Many people are disappointed. The country was characterized by concerns about its own prosperity and uncertainty in the face of the various crises. “The horizon of the future becomes dark and fear is fueled.”

Steinmeier has always seen himself as a bridge builder. It was his declared aim to strengthen “cohesion” in society and to focus on what unites us – not what divides us. But now it almost sounded like a capitulation when he said: "A bridge between the law and contempt for the law, between the pursuit of truth and the willingness to lie, between argument and demagoguery, between inner peace and incitement to violence - such a bridge leads us to the nowhere of arbitrariness."

He was not prepared for the fact that, as a democratic politician, one day he would have to “defend constitutional democracy itself, our pluralism and the fundamental rights of our constitution.”

It was Steinmeier's last speech on October 3rd; His term of office ends in March. As much as he tried to give hope again after his long political career, to create a spirit of optimism, to highlight the “lucky moment in German history,” his thoughtful, almost sad tone prevailed. That didn't fit into the intended cheerfulness of the ceremony with dance and music. Many citizens distrust the political order of the Federal Republic, said Steinmeier: "I don't want to say that they are turning against democracy itself. But, to be honest, I don't know."

The uncertainty among the population that the Federal President spoke about also seemed to have affected him. The fact that he is no longer able to assess the extent to which people are turning against democracy in their own country is actually an outrageous statement given the function of his office. Because it implies that he no longer trusts the citizens.

“Avoiding important fundamental rights”

However, Steinmeier did not speak in a vacuum. In fact, there are systemic disruptions to the political order, which find their clearest expression in the strengthening of the political fringes and especially in the rise of the AfD.

For the Federal President, the situation is clear: a third of voters or even more have stated in past election decisions that they are turning away from “important fundamental rights of our republic”. However, Steinmeier did not explain when voters or the party they voted for - the head of state of course had the AfD in mind here, although without naming them - ever claimed that they wanted to give up basic rights.

It would also be difficult to find proof of this, because even on the political fringes the parties do not explicitly oppose democracy. They even pretend to speak on their behalf and fight for them.

What Steinmeier probably meant was the political radicalization in parts of society, which no longer stops short of electing extremist party representatives: "The unbearable political demagoguery of extremist forces, who enjoy destruction and mock and threaten other people, not only endangers freedom and democracy today. It endangers our internal unity."

Steinmeier refused to make this a purely East German problem. Not only do extremists get the “absolutely most votes” in West German states. In “all developed industrialized countries in Europe and North America” we are dealing with this type of “extremism and angry voters”.

The Federal President became unusually sharp when it came to the role of the media. The “dominance” of the Internet has clouded the judgment of many media outlets – that can roughly sum up his outright media scolding. Before the digital age, media were still able to “distinguish whether someone can derive a mandate from millions of votes or whether they are expressing individual frustration”; “Whether someone with proven expertise is providing information about their field or whether they are spreading hearsay, belief in myths and conspiracy fantasies.”

But now our time of “Internet oligarchs” is characterized by “the constant omnipresence and intrusiveness of all kinds of messages,” by “the advanced presentation of the most absurd idiocies, the shrill emotionalization, the confusion as to whether a human is writing or a machine, whether a citizen or a bot is posting.” All of this is “no longer a sign of quality in the democratic dispute”.

“We are stronger than infamy”

In the deep seriousness of his speech, Steinmeier no longer considered it impossible that German history could repeat itself: “Whether Berlin will become more similar to the Weimar Republic, this question has not yet been decided.” It almost sounded desperate when, despite tendencies to the contrary, he swore: “We belong together, and we stay together.” Finally he counterattacked: "Our democracy is not for sale. It does not surrender itself to its enemies, on the contrary. We are stronger than villainy."

Anyone who speaks like that is already in defense mode. And it's nothing arbitrary that the state's highest representative is trying to defend here - it's more about the democracy of the Federal Republic as we know it. This made Steinmeier's last unity speech memorable, despite some generalizations. It wasn't a new "jerk speech" - but it was a warning that made people sit up and take notice.