Actually, situation seems pretty clear. Two egomaniacs fight for power, one intrigued that or must go. And finally, a political career in backrooms ends – this time by Martin Schulz. So far, so SPD. The undignified withdrawal of Kurt Beck as party chairman at Schwielowsee, Lafontaine's coup against scharping; You know that.

What one could experience on this Friday was superficially again just that: a power struggle. Sigmar Gabriel led sword against ever-impotent Martin Schulz, who had actually promised never to enter Merkel's cabinet, but n looked at it differently and finally saw no choice but to resign. The fact that Gabriel and Schulz were not tired until a few weeks ago to emphasize ir "friendship" is only a footnote in all tragedy.

That this power struggle could unfold with such violence shows that it is more than just vanity. The SPD is doing worse than 2009 at Schwielowsee. And much worse than in fall of 1995 when Lafontaine took power. In fact, Social Democrats have just enough reason to be quite satisfied. They forced union to make clear concessions in coalition talks, knocked out more ministries than y had actually conceded, and in end y could present a treaty that is undoubtedly socially democratic in large parts. There was even a displeasure in Union, results of negotiations were criticized internally and more and more CDU politicians already spoke of fact that Union had to "renew staff". So everything could have been worse for SPD, you might think.

The SPD does not trust itself anymore

And yet in end it is Social Democrats who are in a crisis, whose historical force can probably only be seen when fog of battle in next few weeks is clear. Just why?

The bitter struggle for posts and power is also expression of a profound conceptual and identitarian exhaustion of SPD. The party argues for personnel because it does not trust its content. Because not even convincing Groko followers know wher what we have negotiated is really enough to stop erosion of People's Party. Many in party suspect that time of pragmatism is over. That it will no longer be enough to conjure up middle before every election campaign, to compete with a middle-social democratic programme, only to end up with 20 per cent somewhere. or even below it.

Like a mantra, Groko opponents summoned " great" at party congress. The party had to develop visions again, mobilising projects, demands were. But, you have to say it so clearly, none of it is re. The right wing was never interested in visions and party left did not develop m. How a social democracy would have to act in 21st century, where foundations of one's own actions lie, how a policy based on national balance of interests can be maintained at a time of global financial and commodity flows – all of which has been The party was never as fundamentally discussed as reality would have demanded.

And so party's programmatic emptiness forms stage on which power struggles of se days are playing. And so SPD is getting closer to abyss. For with coup in narrowest circle of management crumbles Perhaps most important argument with which Groko proponents wanted to convince grumpy party base: stability. A No to grand coalition, it was said, Reelections, change of leadership, in short: chaos.

Now party leadership has worried about chaos that she wanted to prevent. And so at present no one is sure how members of party decide, if in a few weeks with coalition agreement y also vote on political style of ir leadership. Martin Schulz, so much is clear, will no longer play an essential role. His steep ascent and even steeper decline were closely linked to great word of credibility. He shot up because he seemed to embody it – finally again. And all more hämischer comments were made when he became word-brittle (a bit far away it had to be) and was suddenly considered a principleless one.

In fact, lack of credibility for SPD in post-Schroeder period is a central problem. This Friday, after resignation of Schulz, a bit more of it has been lost again.

Date Of Update: 10 February 2018, 12:03