Trust in politics

The path is being cleared for €500 billion in debt for infrastructure and other projects "to regain lost trust in the state and democracy," writes Der Spiegel about the current negotiations on the debt brake and special funds. The Frankfurter Rundschau asks: "Merz's plan for the special fund: How long will the Germans' trust last?" There's a lot of talk these days about "trust" in politics. An interesting concept.

I place my trust in you. But you must behave the way I expect, otherwise I will withdraw my trust. In personal relationships, this concept already has a great deal of potential for drama. A single mistake, and trust can be "withdrawn." In a political context, this certainly doesn't work. This is evident, for example, in the current debates. Should we "trust" that the new government will do everything right with the hundreds of billions in debt?

Should one "trust" that the money is being used for the benefit of the people? No. Because then the "loss of trust" is inherent: One mistake—and it always depends on what people perceive as a mistake—and trust is "withdrawn." In politics, "trust" only makes sense when it is combined with control. Democracy can only function if politics is controlled. That is the basis of the separation of powers.

This is why the media, judiciary, parliament, and civil society play such central roles in a democracy. This is also the reason why Donald Trump has been dismantling all institutions, individuals, and positions designed to oversee government action for weeks. On a Friday evening a few weeks ago, Trump fired more than a dozen "Inspector Generals" in one fell swoop. These are independent officials in various ministries and institutions, are considered impartial, and are supposed to uncover or prevent abuse, waste of taxpayer money, and corruption. Trump apparently believes people should simply "trust" him.

Income influences political opinions

Power and abuse are closely intertwined. At least, if the structures allow it. Regardless of how honest the actors involved are. The lobby structure in Germany alone, for example, the substantial financial resources of the financial lobby, represents a structure of abuse of power. Top politicians face an overwhelming number of lobby groups, such as the financial and pharmaceutical industries, and other actors such as the Foundation for Family Businesses.

Accordingly, the University of Osnabrück found in a long-term study published in 2016 that " income influences political opinions ." Political decisions, the researchers stated, are "more likely to align with the attitudes of higher-income groups." Furthermore, there is "a clear bias in political decisions to the detriment of the poor."

So should we trust that politics fundamentally acts for the good of all people? No, obviously not. And not because politicians are "evil" or even corrupt. But because the political system is designed in such a way that it doesn't automatically produce results that serve the majority of the population. The exploratory paper by the CDU/CSU and SPD is a case in point: It proposed tax breaks for restaurateurs whose purpose for the general public was at least questionable.

Both the future opposition and many media outlets questioned this: This is control. With the hundreds of billions in debt and future debt to be approved this week in the Bundestag and Bundesrat, things look somewhat more difficult. How such debt is possible is being explained far too little by politicians and the media. The reason for this is clear: the grave threat posed by Russia and the authoritarian behavior of Trump, who had already threatened during the presidential campaign to throw Europe to Russia.

European states must be able to protect their populations against any potential Russian attack, whether cyberspace or military. There seems to be widespread consensus that this isn't the case today. At the same time, who will explain to people that last year, a basic child benefit program budgeted at around €12 billion failed because it was too expensive – but now, within three weeks, they 're trying to enable debt of €1 trillion or more?

The media and politicians explain to the public why the debt is necessary and what it will be used for. But how can that be? Why one thing and not the other? Does it have to do with priorities? Politically, honesty is needed; the media needs doubt – so that people feel that this process is under control. The foundation of a democracy is not trust.

A healthy democratic foundation is appreciative mistrust. Not because one mistrusts "politics" or even politicians—people who hold political office, whether voluntary, municipal, or at the top, to improve people's lives and, in the vast majority, act to the best of their knowledge and belief—but because one believes in resilient, stable democratic structures that check and criticize power.

If people are not to lose "trust" in democracy in these times of crisis, it is important not to allow an imbalance between the state and the population. This is the responsibility of the political parties, the judiciary, and, above all, the media. The best remedy against "loss of trust" is criticism of power.