[ad_1]
reThe disputed object is about 2.20 meters high, 80 centimeters wide and looks silver: we are talking about the common patio heater. For many years it had a permanent place on the terraces of restaurants and bars during the cold season, then more and more cities banned the energy devourer. In the fall of the German Crown, the outdoor stove is once again omnipresent, not yet in the restaurant sector, but in the political debate. Should this winter be allowed again as an exception to allow restaurateurs to do more business? Or does climate protection come before sales? The Greens, in particular, are divided on this issue. While the boys insist on climate protection, parliamentary group leader Anton Hofreiter is promoting a pragmatic course. “I’m not a fan of patio heaters,” he said recently. “But before all the restaurants go bankrupt, they should install patio heaters.”
Philipp krohn
Business writer, head of “People and companies”.
If that was intended to be some kind of power word, it didn’t work. The discussion about patio heaters continues happily. At best, your CO2 emissions are marginally significant; Patio heaters have long become a symbol of the big picture. Whoever is in favor of them is against climate protection. And vice versa. It is a discussion of extremes, as in so many other areas of politics. The other camp is discredited for being morally inferior. The result is many stagnant conflicts. And the feeling of discomfort: where does this lead when every detail becomes a matter of principle?
Wolfgang Merkel, political scientist
:
Photo: Private
One who watches this development with concern is Berlin democracy researcher Wolfgang Merkel. “The fact that so many areas of politics are morally loaded is a big problem,” he says. “We see that with climate protection, but also when it comes to immigration policy or the crown.” Suddenly, there is only truth or lies, in black or white. “Trenches are being dug there that no one can overcome. Because any compromise is morally seen as treason. However, compromise is one of the cornerstones of democracy. ” The eleven-year “grand” coalition of the last fifteen years, which has been shaped by compromise formulas and abandoned ideals, has likely fueled this growing skepticism against mediating positions.
“Lack of solidarity and emotional cold”
Phasing out coal now, immediate ban on combustion engine sales, “Danni” received instead of new roads: the fact that in political debates everyone starts with their maximum demand is not the problem, says Merkel. “If the champions of the Fridays for Future movement did not make radical demands, then they run the risk of people staying away or migrating to Extinction Rebellion.” The issue becomes a problem as soon as radical demands are declared to be the red line, the only acceptable solution. “There are already the first to argue: because of Corona, politicians have restricted basic rights, why not also for climate protection, if necessary?” Merkel says. “They are no longer satisfied with the coal fees. Here eco-authoritarianism is indicated. “
Mainz student Clemens Traub experienced what Merkel structurally describes directly in the movement. Because he is convinced that he belongs to the generation that will be the first to feel climate change, he has participated in the Friday demonstrations since the beginning of 2019. As a “passionate follower”, as he puts it. Whenever he talked about it with his friends in his village in the southern Palatinate, they reacted by shaking their heads. Fridays for Future is a “big city elitist movement.” Over time, Traub had to agree more and more with them. “One of the problems of this medium is that they do not have meeting places where they can meet people from other media,” he says. “People do not move between chairs and only go where they receive applause for their thesis.”
