It is a pleasure to see you all here today. I am delighted that you are interested in this second Forum Bellevue on the Transformation of Society. In this series of talks, we are taking a close look at the great transformation that we have embarked on to ensure that our economy and our society are climate neutral by the year 2045.
During the Forum’s first edition last July, we discussed how we can become a post-fossil industrial society, as a leader in technology, with a network that spans the globe, while being better prepared to deal with crises and disasters. Today, we want to focus on the societal effects of the transformation: how do those affected view the opportunities and risks? Who has reservations about, and opposes, transformation? And where can we find success stories that can lend courage to others? The key question today is: how, in these times marked by crises and change, can we succeed in maintaining cohesion within our society and defending our liberal democracy?
All of you who are gathered in this room work in different ways to promote democracy, achieve healthy living conditions and good societal integration – at the local political level and in the spheres of business, science and culture, in churches and religious communities. I am so glad you have joined us today, and I extend a warm welcome to all of you.
We have seen upset farmers and lorry drivers blocking the country’s roads with their tractors and lorries – perhaps similar to the previous actions of climate activists, who had glued themselves to the road and were dragged away by angry motorists; we see public debates that suddenly get overheated when they touch on hot-button issues such as speed limits or meat consumption; citizens who respond in polls that in upcoming elections they intend to vote for populists or right-wing extremists – we have witnessed all of that. However, we have also seen hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life, all across Germany, from Görlitz to Kleve, from Rosenheim to Westerland, turning out to demonstrate for democracy and human rights.
I believe it is justified to ask: what is happening in this society?
And anyone who asks this question is certainly glad if Steffen Mau happens to be nearby. Mr Mau, in your most recent book, you size up and map out the conflicts in our country. You come to a conclusion which initially surprises your readers: the widely held view that a rift runs through society, marked by two groups with opposing world-views that are irreconcilably or even in a hostile manner pitted against each other – according to your study, this view is not borne out by reality. It is quite the opposite: when – you say –it comes to just distribution, a humane policy of taking in refugees, living together despite our differences, or concerns about climate change, then there is a great deal of consensus in our multifaceted society. These are the results of your study.
It could be that some people here today take a different view. But that is what we are going to discuss. But I want to point out that you by no means want this study to be read as saying there is nothing to worry about. However, your findings provide food for thought and show how important it is to take a closer look, that we should perhaps be careful not to blow every protest out of proportion just because it gets lots of attention. Let us refrain from making blanket judgements, casting others as the enemy and claiming the high moral ground. And let us not jump to conclusions about individual traits which highlight differences, let us not assume they are a sign of the close-minded political world-views of the other or other groups.
At any rate the study rather points to something – and we will talk about this in a minute – of which I remain convinced, namely that, in Germany, what connects us is greater than what separates us – despite there undeniably being conflicts, despite the loud way these are carried out, and despite the radical language which I, too, have noticed. The vast majority of people in our country believe in democracy as it is enshrined in the Basic Law. And the majority wants to continue to live in a free and, above all, diverse society.
Yet this does not mean – you all sense and know this – that there is no reason to worry. Many people in our country live more or less in social bubbles. Our various walks of life have grown further apart, encounters between people living different lives have grown rare, and the lives of others are largely characterised by the fact that we hardly know them or do not know them at all. As a result, people know little about the needs and worries of those on different life trajectories, who face very different limits on the opportunities available to them. Many people have lost faith in the institutions and representatives of liberal democracy – either because they feel they are not being seen, heard or represented; or because in their everyday lives they see how many things, ranging from the train service to the internet, are not working as might be expected; or perhaps also because they have lost faith in progress; because they are worried about the future of their children.
If we want to strengthen liberal democracy and win back people’s support, then we must also – and that is what we are going to do today – seek out what is causing the disappointment, the bitterness or the anger. In a moment, two of us will kick off the discussion here in front and then continue the debate with all of you.
We are living in exceptionally difficult times. The pandemic, climate change, extreme weather events, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, terror and war in the Middle East – all this has shaken our society, worries people and unsettles all of us. At a time when we are already facing concurrent crises, the transformation to a sustainable society, too, is now becoming an ever greater part of our daily lives. It can be seen and felt everywhere – in the city, in industrial regions and also in the countryside. How we produce, plant our fields, obtain our energy, use transportation, build, heat, and live – all this is rapidly changing. People are seeing what was familiar collapsing, forcing us to rethink and change how we act. And it is becoming increasingly apparent that the opportunities and risks of change are unequally distributed, with unreasonable demands and burdens weighing on people in very different ways.
The vast majority of people in our country, across all social strata and generations, want more climate protection, they want policies that ensure healthy living conditions. But of course, and we could sense this: when it comes to specific steps and changes, then conflicts frequently give rise to resistance. Often, those who are sceptical are the same ones who have had to tackle difficult change in the past. People in the eastern parts of Germany who after reunification experienced loss and affronts, or those in industrial regions such as the Ruhr area or Lusatia, have lived through decades of structural change, know how much can be lost in the process, not only economically but also in terms of respect and their sense of home. Especially in the east, where one and the same generation is currently facing their third great transformation, many have grown tired of adapting to change.
It is not always experienced loss, but often also expected loss, the fear of loss, that makes people averse to change. Particularly those who have jobs, prosperity or social standing to lose sometimes react with rejection and incomprehension – especially when they feel they are being steamrolled by transformation, that "higher ups" want them to change, or when they have the impression that they are being lectured to about supposedly having been on the wrong track until now.
I hope that Mr Mau is not right when he predicts that climate action is perhaps the great, emerging class conflict. However, it is right to say that if we want to prevent parts of our society from drifting further apart, if we want to get people who have turned their backs to reconsider, then we must place the question of justice even more at the centre of debates on climate policy. How can we design the individual steps we take towards a post-fossil future in a way that costs, burdens, opportunities and benefits are justly distributed? How can we ensure that those who fear they will be among the losers during transition also have something to gain? How can we become a climate-neutral country that provides good jobs and prosperity to as many as possible? We have to find answers to these questions, and we have to find them now and not in ten or twenty years, not in 2045.
However, this includes talking not only about the difficulties we face. Let us also talk about success stories, of which there are a considerable number in our country.
I see this time and again during my trips through Germany, whether as part of the "Ortszeit" or "Werkstatt des Wandels" event series. Cities as diverse as Altenburg, Quedlinburg, Neustrelitz, Freiberg, Völklingen, Senftenberg, Eckernförde and Zwickau have, each in their own way, long since forged a path to a fossil-free future. Often, they have used the transformation to productively combine the old and the new. I am referring not only to wind turbines that have been installed on land where brown coal was once mined.
During my last visit to Zwickau, I met a man who in his professional life had actually experienced two great transitions. In the GDR, he had worked on the Trabant assembly line. After reunification, he built a future for himself at Volkswagen. And now, he has successfully transitioned to the age of e-mobility. Let me tell you, this experienced autoworker nearly burst with pride when he told me that his Zwickau plant is today leading the way in the assembly of electric cars.
In Lusatia, where for many years people were proud of coal mining, there is not only new railway technology being developed. At Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg and the Lausitz Science Park, they are applying innovative thinking to the energy transition and climate-neutral aviation, and a medical faculty is to be based in Cottbus. And in Freiberg, in the Free State of Saxony, which for centuries was shaped by the mining and metallurgical industries, a business location with age-old traditions has successfully been modernised and made fit for the future: the former East German state-owned company VEB Spurenmetalle, for example, has been transformed into a company that grows crystals for microchips, and other companies there produce silicon wafers or supplies for communications technology.
In saying this, I certainly do not mean to gloss over things. Transition remains a very difficult task. It brings with it tensions and disappointment, even when we all agree it is a path we must go down. The mayors who are with us here today – including from the industrial belts in the east and west of Germany – can contribute on this subject.
Everyone in this room is grappling with the challenges of transformation – from many different standpoints. Whether you come from industry or academia, federal or local politics, social welfare or environmental associations or churches, please do not hesitate to weigh in on our debate – I look forward to hearing about your experiences, your thoughts and ideas.
I originally wanted to begin with a panel that included myself and two guests – but Judith Borowski, a member of the management board of the watch manufacturer Nomos, has unfortunately fallen ill and had to cancel at short notice. She would have had much to say about a manufacturer in the east which has grown into a company operating on a global scale. She would have had much to say about why eastern Germany is a good location and why it will hopefully remain so. At any rate, let us wish her a speedy recovery; she may even be watching a stream of the event.
That is why today’s Forum will get underway with a two-person panel discussion. I have already mentioned my guest, who does not require a lengthy introduction, at least not among those present here today: Steffen Mau is a professor of sociology at the Humboldt‑Universität here in Berlin. He is also a public intellectual who reaches a wide audience with his books, essays, articles and interviews, particularly at present but also in past years. In his book "Lütten Klein", he shines a spotlight on experiences with the transformation in eastern Germany. Now in his major work "Triggerpunkte", which he wrote with two co-authors, he examines the "rugged topography of conflicts" in our society. It is very nice to have you here, Mr Mau. I bid you a warm welcome!
This room at Schloss Bellevue has not been transformed into a forum for such debates on its own. I want to thank the ZEIT Stiftung Bucerius – specifically you, Mr Hartung – for our excellent cooperation. And now I am looking forward to our discussion.
