Introduction

The document which follows is a compilation of parts of reports delivered to ICT meetings by our comrades from the Gruppe Internationalistischer KommunistInnen (GIK). They have been compiled by our Italian comrades of Battaglia Comunista (PCInt) and translated into English by the Communist Workers’ Organisation (CWO). The Italian comrades stress how these extracts from Germany

demonstrate yet again how, despite local factors, the bourgeoisie everywhere has the same objectives and the same strategies for attacking the working class. It also debunks the myth of a German working class living in a kind of paradise compared to its Italian counterpart. In this context, the rise of the neo-fascist, populist AfD party is one of the effects of both the structural crisis of capital and the state of prostration and disorientation into which the bourgeoisie has thrown the proletariat, which has been suffering endless economic, social, and political attacks for decades.

A similar report from Italy has already been translated and will appear in the January 2026 edition of Revolutionary Perspectives.

The Situation in Germany

The political crisis of German capitalism continues to set the agenda and cause tensions and conflicts within the ruling class. We have already outlined in previous reports the three essential components of the strategic and economic defense of German imperialism:

1. The loss of affordable energy sources as a result of the war in Ukraine;
2. The need to align with American imperialism following the Russian invasion and to set aside ambitions of European leadership;
3. The structural crisis of German industry, which has lost markets in China and fallen behind in global competition. In addition, US tariffs are weakening German exports.

During the Merkel era, the crisis was more or less managed. The bourgeoisie is aware that, given the new economic and geostrategic conditions, massive investment and austerity are necessary. Merkel is now seen by them more as a scapegoat and responsible for “blocking reforms.” However, there are serious differences over how, when, and to what extent to go on the offensive. These are reflected in the multiple crises of the current government. Merz has failed to live up to the expectations placed on him. He is generally regarded as a chancellor of empty promises who likes to talk big. The cracks are particularly evident in the current pension dispute. The level of pensions has fallen from 53% in 2000 to the current 48%. The SPD and CDU government has agreed to fix the pension level at 48% until 2031 and to postpone a comprehensive “reform” of the pension system until later. These are, of course, fictitious figures. A pension level of 48% can only be achieved with an average salary after 45 years. An example: if the average gross income is €3,000, 48% corresponds to a gross pension of €1,440. This, too, is an unattainable dream for most people. Already today, 3.5 million people are affected by poverty in old age. This corresponds to a percentage of 19.4%. Women are particularly affected by this phenomenon.

However, in order to maintain the pension level at 48%, the pension fund would require an annual subsidy of €127 billion from the Federal budget. It is precisely on this issue that Merz’s former neoliberal Praetorian Guard, the Junge Union (youth organization of the CDU), disagrees. It argues that contributions to the pension fund would be paid by the younger generation and is effectively calling for a more drastic reduction in pensions. This is therefore the well-worn demagogy that pits young against old. What is not mentioned is that neither MPs in the Bundestag nor civil servants pay in to the public pension fund and that the wealthy also provide for their own private pensions. The public pension is therefore supported by the working class. However, due to unemployment and increasingly precarious jobs, pension funds are diminishing. Powerful insurance companies naturally have a vested interest in keeping the situation as it is, as more and more people are forced to take out additional private pension insurance.

Merz was taken completely by surprise by this revolt in his own ranks. (He was also very busy covering up his embarrassing appearances in Brazil, Africa, etc. However, the public sees him more as a clumsy provincial who never misses an opportunity to do something foolish). Be that as it may, his government has only a narrow majority. Attempts are currently being made to exert internal pressure on the youth group. It remains to be seen whether this will be successful. If the youth group’s representatives vote against the pension plans next week, the CDU and SPD government will not have a majority and will effectively be finished. This would open the door to the AfD.

Of course, the government has not been completely inactive. Heavy cuts have been prepared for those in receipt of welfare, and important steps have been taken to reintroduce compulsory military service. But this is not enough for the bourgeoisie.

The Merz government has placed particular emphasis on tightening the law on asylum-seekers and has stepped up deportations. Deportations to Afghanistan have been facilitated through talks with the Taliban (something that was unthinkable for a long time). In addition, deportations to Syria are in the pipeline. When Foreign Minister Wadephuhl questioned this decision during a visit to Syria, he was publicly reprimanded and fell into line with the government’s policy. With his statement on the urban landscape (he said that progress had been made in migration policy, but that there was still a problem in the urban landscape, referring to people who do not look German), he once again fueled racism. Merz hopes to weaken the AfD in this way. But the opposite is true. The AfD continues to lead in the polls. Its popularity is growing. Especially in the CDU associations in eastern Germany, there are increasingly insistent calls for a definitive departure from the so-called firewall [the wall of separation that a priori excludes any agreement with the AfD, ed.]. It is no coincidence that even the association of family entrepreneurs, i.e., small and medium-sized capitalists (who often sympathize with the AfD), has spoken out in favor of no longer considering the AfD a taboo. In the regional elections in eastern Germany, the AfD is currently expected to achieve a massive electoral success (reaching almost 40% in some states, such as Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania). Many political observers believe that, by then, at the very latest, the Merz government will not last. We can therefore expect an AfD government or a government with AfD participation.

The Left Party [Die Linke, ed.] is struggling to maintain its support. In the polls, it averages around 10%. In Berlin, it is aiming for an election victory (following Mamdani’s example) and a return to government. However, recent polls show a strengthening of the AfD here too. (Berlin is generally considered a liberal or left-wing city). After the electoral success in January, the usual Trotskyist groups are practicing entryism. According to our information, they are causing quite a bit of damage. However, they are becoming increasingly influential (as are the Stalinist groups). All this is determined by the Palestinian question (the war in Ukraine is rather secondary in the perception of the left). As already reported, here the Trotskyist/Stalinist positions (“right to self-determination of peoples”) and petty-bourgeois identity politics merge in a nefarious symbiosis. This sometimes takes absurd forms, such as slogans such as “Palestine, GDR! Friendship between peoples is not difficult” or “Zionists to Bautzen” (Bautzen was the largest prison for political prisoners in the GDR). Anyone critical of their positions here are labelled “Zionists.” At the same time, however, recognition of Israel’s so-called “right to exist” is a fundamental condition for involvement in government (the strategic calculation of the Left Party). The party leadership tries to mask these conflicts and tensions with an “economist line” that puts the emphasis on rent and social issues. It is questionable whether it will succeed.