Professor Lengfeld, what does “social justice” mean?
Justice is an enigmatic term that is used in many different ways. It very often involves the distribution of scarce resources. Those who demand justice make the moral claim that they get what they deserve. It is interesting that people consider various principles to be morally correct, depending on their social position. This can be seen in the current debate about the SPD’s proposal for the new “basic pension” in Germany: businesses oppose it because they want fair pensions to be determined strictly on the basis of past contributions. The unions, on the other hand, think the proposal is good because they consider criteria of equality and securing people’s basic needs to be socially just.
In France, it seems that large swathes of the population are calling social justice into question. The so-called “yellow-vest” protests are continuing. Is this the beginning of a broader social movement? Is such a movement also conceivable – or already recognisable – in Germany?
I’m no expert on French society. But my impression is that the yellow vests have emerged because part of the population felt unjustly treated by the government. The increase in fuel prices seems to have merely been the trigger. The real underlying conflict was President Macron’s labour market reforms, which involve painful cuts for workers. The situation in Germany is entirely different. Our labour market reforms began 15 years ago. Incomes are continuing to grow and unemployment is low. So what reason would Germans have today to don yellow vests en masse?
The SPD has indicated that it wants to re-establish itself as the advocate for social justice. Will parties be able to score political points with this issue in the upcoming European and state parliamentary elections?
At the moment I don’t see the parties being able to win over many voters with social justice. The SPD has assumed a special role here. It is trying, I would almost say desperately, to reverse its declining popularity with voters. To do this, it is drawing on its traditional profile of achieving social justice through more redistribution of wealth. Since the economy is faring well at the moment and there is a relatively dynamic party to the left of the SPD, I think it is unlikely that this will help it attract more than 30 per cent of the national vote again, like it did back in 2005.
Good social policies are also seen by many politicians as a means of preventing the growth of the AfD and a split in society. But now you have found out in your studies that the majority of AfD voters’ motives are not economic in nature. Can we infer from this that social justice is not the decisive issue for social cohesion?
People’s belief that society is fair is important for social cohesion, but it alone is not enough. Our studies show that the AfD’s success has little to do with actual issues of distribution. Its sympathisers are more worried about the direction in which society is currently developing culturally, such as openness to immigration, increased European integration, more multiculturalism, mounting calls to abandon environmentally damaging consumption patterns in order to protect the climate, and acceptance of different gender identities. All this is happening, yet part of the population does not want it. That’s why I once described these people – without passing judgement – as losers of societal modernisation. They are now exercising their right to vote to support the AfD, a party that promises to reverse these cultural changes. Social policy seems almost meaningless in this discussion.
Please note:
Professor Holger Lengfeld is one of more than 150 specialists at Leipzig University whose expertise you can call upon using our Expert Service.