display
WORLD:
Mr. Bartsch, you will lead the Left together with Janine Wissler as the top candidate in the federal election campaign.
What is your goal?
Dietmar Bartsch:
In the last general election we achieved 9.2 percent.
We want to improve, to achieve double digits.
We will succeed in setting out on this.
I am confident that it will work, also because Janine Wissler and I have an objective and goal-oriented management style in common.
WORLD:
In view of your party's polling figures, which are stagnating at six to seven percent, this is a bold announcement.
Shouldn't you rather be afraid of failing the five percent hurdle?
display
Bartsch:
No.
There is no reason to worry about entering the Bundestag.
Elections will be held in September.
"The left has some strategic questions to clarify"
Source: Martin UK Lengemann / WELT
WELT: In
any case, you are not benefiting from the dissatisfaction with the current government.
Fabio De Masi - one of your group colleagues who is also recognized by other parties - has defined the problem of the left as follows: too aloof, too moralizing, too far away from the people who earn their money with their own hands.
Bartsch:
I'm neither aloof, nor too far away from the people.
But the left has some strategic questions to clarify.
But socialists and social democrats have this task almost everywhere in the world.
They all experience election defeats.
We are far from that.
display
WORLD:
The Social Democrats in Denmark are a counterexample.
Their course is comparable to the positions of your comrade Sahra Wagenknecht: rigid in migration and generous in social matters.
In her book “The Self-Righteous”, Wagenknecht settles accounts with the left, which prefers to present itself as an identity-political avant-garde than as a representative of the socially weak.
Bartsch:
Identity and class politics are not contradicting each other, the discourse is academic and does nothing to improve people's lives.
The left is and will remain a pluralist party.
I want to bring out the strengths of the individual figures on the left in the election campaign.
This includes Sahra Wagenknecht as well as Katja Kipping, Gregor Gysi and Amira Mohamed Ali.
We will make this cooperation productive.
WORLD:
When Wagenknecht was chosen as the top candidate in North Rhine-Westphalia, there were party withdrawals.
display
Bartsch:
There were many more resignations from the CDU than Hans-Georg Maaßen was nominated as a direct candidate.
WORLD:
Is Sahra Wagenknecht your Hans-Georg Maaßen?
Bartsch:
How did you come up with such a comparison?
In its desperation, the Thuringian CDU is taking the measures open to the right because its previous member of the Bundestag, Mark Hauptmann, has filled his own pockets with dirty mask deals and coal from the dictatorial regime of Azerbaijan.
WORLD:
The discussion is not just an intra-party discussion, it is about a phenomenon that affects society as a whole, in which politics is defined through morality and attitudes.
Bartsch:
Yes, we should really talk about attitude in this election campaign. Why the Union allows some of its MEPs to take care of their own extra income instead of the well-being of our country. First and foremost, the left advocates fair distribution: between rich and poor, between the sexes, between wealthy and disadvantaged regions.
The difficulty is that we are faced with the coincidence of several challenges: the climate crisis, the refugee crisis, the digital age.
We make an offer for the big questions.
We want to take everyone with us, leave no one behind.
If we look at France and the USA, we see what course social division can take.
In Germany we are in a danger zone when it comes to social cohesion.
This is an assignment for us.
WORLD:
In order to fulfill this mandate, you have to go into government.
Why should the Greens form a coalition with you?
display
Bartsch:
Constellation debates are distracting.
Now is the election campaign and we are promoting ourselves.
One thing is clear: a central question in these federal elections will be who will pay for this crisis.
In the pandemic, money is thrown around.
450 billion new debts were taken on.
WORLD:
A government with the Left Party would also throw money around.
Bartsch:
But we also say where the money should come from: We want to burden the multimillionaires and billionaires in order to protect everyone else from the corona bill.
Among other things, with a one-off property levy that would only affect 0.7 percent of the population.
The alternative is shortening.
However, this must not happen with state investments or with social spending.
Public services of general interest must be improved - Corona has clearly shown this, for example in the health and education sectors.
WORLD:
Germany has a health system that most countries envy us.
Bartsch:
Yes, but the crisis revealed clear weaknesses.
We have huge problems with the medical staff.
Too few nurses, insufficient pay, poor working conditions.
Society has to ask itself whether or not it wants the healthcare system to be commercialized.
The left doesn't want it.
Hospitals are not there for profit.
It is similar with local public transport, which is decisive for the ecological question.
We must not allow CO2 prices to go up and only the rich can afford climate protection.
WORLD:
After the judgment in Karlsruhe, the grand coalition is outbidding itself when it comes to climate targets.
Everyone wants to be green.
Not the left?
display
Bartsch:
Anyone who denies that climate change is a central issue has not understood anything.
The real question is how do we shape climate policy.
Anyone who wants to ban diesel or combustion engines scares people in the country.
Such demands are a threat to many.
We have to take this seriously and make changes fair and wise.
WORLD:
Does that mean with the left there will still be an internal combustion engine and low fuel prices?
Bartsch:
Anyone who works as a cashier or craftsman or commutes many kilometers every week and drives to the gas station in their perhaps six-year-old Golf does not perceive the fuel prices as low.
Especially since they have increased significantly since the beginning of the year due to the CO2 price.
At the same time, the promised relief from the climate package is not there, buses and trains are not getting better and often do not even travel in rural areas.
Yes, the combustion engine is increasingly becoming obsolete and will come to an end in the foreseeable future.
But the job of politics is to improve people's lives - not to take something away from those who have no alternative.
WORLD:
In your draft election program, your party blames the "rich - with numerous trips, large properties and yachts" for climate change.
Should a travel and yacht ban save the climate?
Bartsch:
It's not about banning yachts, it's about limiting obscene wealth.
I come from Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, I know the prices of some private yachts.
If people can afford a second or third yacht, that's perverse.
Nobody can make hundreds of millions or even billions with their own hands.
display
WORLD:
Why are you just ruling that out?
Startups are quickly turning into multi-billion dollar companies.
Bartsch:
I have nothing against millionaires who have earned their wealth through their own work - but as a rule, insanity is usually inherited.
In addition, the employees help a lot.
Jeff Bezos is getting richer while his workers have been fighting for a fair collective agreement for years.
We have an unfair tax system from the past century.
Small and middle incomes are burdened far too much, while the wealthy get off cheaply.
We have to change that.
Performance must be more worthwhile.
WORLD:
Most of the tax revenue is already borne by only a small part of the taxpayer.
"Not everyone who has three apartments is an evil capitalist"
Source: Martin UK Lengemann / WELT
Bartsch:
Wrong.
Small and medium incomes bear the greatest burden.
Of course, very high incomes have to be taxed higher.
Nobody seriously questions the principle.
Even the USA with Joe Biden is one step ahead of the German discussion.
WORLD:
What happens when the left is part of a government can be seen in Berlin: The rent cap was enforced against all legal warnings.
Tenants who are facing massive repayments now have to unload it.
Do you have a guilty conscience?
Bartsch:
No.
The rent cap sparked a discussion about affordable housing, which was important.
The Federal Constitutional Court only ruled that jurisdiction lies with the federal government.
We will address this in the election campaign and in the coming legislative period.
I do not believe that the nationwide rent cap is the only panacea.
But something has to be done.
Living in the big city must be affordable again - for everyone.
WORLD:
If the nationwide rent cap is not the panacea from your point of view, what then?
Expropriation in the sense of SPD Vice Kevin Kühnert, who thinks that everyone should have at most the living space in which they live?
Bartsch:
Not everyone who has three apartments is an evil capitalist right away.
If you like, a private person can have several apartments.
What we want to act against are the large corporations that hardly build an apartment, but rather buy up existing houses, force out the old tenants and, after renovation, go on the market for exorbitant rents.
That destroys our cities and the way we live together.
WORLD:
Your plans do not help the people who now have to make repayments.
Shouldn't the left at least apologize to these people?
Bartsch:
Senator for Construction Scheel did that in Berlin by immediately launching a compensation fund.
Wouldn't an excuse from the federal government that has done nothing for affordable housing for years would be much more appropriate?
We have to make it clear that the last word on the housing market has not yet been spoken.
The election in September will also decide on this.
WORLD:
Green politician Cem Özdemir recently ruled out coalitions with parties that have no clear relationship to human rights violations, for example in Russia or China.
When will the left finally take a clear stand?
Bartsch:
I've done that several times.
Incidentally, Cem Özdemir does not specify what a clear relationship is.
Which parties did Vladimir Putin visit in recent years?
That wasn't the left, but the CSU and the SPD.
I can hardly imagine that Mr Özdemir wants to rule out coalitions with these parties.
It's all about attaching the absurd label of “Putin understanders” to us, even though, unlike Cem Özdemir, I really understand Russian.
WORLD:
You cannot deny the reflex of the old block thinking in your party.
Bartsch:
My position is that, with our German history, we need a more sensitive Russia and Eastern policy.
That’s what I’m saying on Liberation Day.
It is clear that human rights violations must be condemned, everywhere and according to the same criteria.
Programmatically this is clear, the problem lies more in practice.
This has sometimes led to statements from my party that I do not share and that I have criticized.
WORLD:
Your economic policy spokesman Klaus Ernst said, for example, that the poisoning of the Russian opposition politician Alexej Navalny was of no use to President Vladimir Putin - and he implied that this would benefit the USA.
That must have upset you.
Russia equates Navalny supporters with terrorists
Russia has put the imprisoned Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny’s regional staff on the list of extremist and terrorist organizations.
They are thus equated with terrorist organizations such as al-Qaida and the "Islamic State".
Source: WELT / Christoph Wanner
Bartsch:
No speculation here.
I made that clear too.
There is enough criticism of Russia: the way it treats homosexuals, for example, or the assassination attempt on Sergei Skripal in Great Britain.
When it comes to human rights, the same standards must apply to everyone, in Turkey, in Egypt or in China or Venezuela - to name a few other countries.
WELT:
One of your positions is that NATO must be dissolved or that Germany should at least get out of the military structures.
Green leader Robert Habeck has made a commitment to the military alliance on the part of your party a condition for a coalition.
Are you committed to NATO?
Bartsch:
I recommend Robert Habeck a little more humility.
My party does not go into the election campaign with confessions to the Greens, but with an offer to the voters.
NATO and the Bundeswehr have been in Afghanistan for 20 years.
As a result, the Taliban are back at the controls.
As part of government responsibility, the Greens have repeatedly agreed to this mission. The French President calls NATO “brain death”. We need answers to the global crises of the 21st century. The most sensible way to do this is to significantly strengthen global organizations, but not with clumsy commitments, and certainly not with armament.