German Politics and Society

The article places the current malaise afflicting the Federal Republic of Germany in a post-war historical context. It argues that the recent reversal in Chancellor Angela Merkel's academic and journalistic fortunes—from darling to devil within a few short years—reflects a broader schizophrenia in the intelligentsia's views on Germany's economy. Since the early 1950s, opinion has swung, almost violently, from fawning adoration to dark pessimism. We have, in short, been here before, and the present apocalyptic gloom is, as it has always been in the past, likely overdone. The article then reviews the crises Germany is confronting—including housing, decaying infrastructure, migration, and the seemingly unstoppable rise of the far right—and outlines how the contributions to this special issue address these and other challenges.

This article considers Germany's response to the Hamas attacks on Israel of 7 October 2023 and the Israeli assault on Gaza that followed and analyzes the impacts of that response on how the Holocaust is studied and understood. I identify three rifts that have widened as a result: between public and scholarly discourse on the Holocaust; between the concepts of Holocaust and genocide; and around what I call “bespoke histories” of the Holocaust, that is, versions of the Holocaust designed to fit the demands and desires of the present. With regard to these developments, Germany is distinctive but not unique.

This article explores human trafficking for labor in Germany's meat industry. Journalists have often associated trafficking with Asia (above all Thailand) and with sex work. In fact, human trafficking for (non-sex) labor is more common globally, and it is endemic in the Federal Republic. The article argues that three features of the German economy make the country highly susceptible to labor trafficking: (1) its export-driven growth model reliant on low wages, (2) the size of its low-wage sector, and (3) its highly price-sensitive consumer market. German consumers want to pay less and less—and ideally nothing—for more and more.

Germany's Energiewende (energy transition) is often misunderstood as a top-down industrial policy triggered by the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Its origins lie much earlier, however, rooted in decades of grassroots activism, citizen-driven initiatives, and policy innovations like the feed-in tariff, which collectively propelled significant renewable energy expansion nationwide. This article explores the historical evolution of the Energiewende, the tensions between bottom-up and top-down approaches to it, and the implications of later decisions by the federal government to controversially embrace more centralized policy tools like the auction system. By analyzing both local and national dynamics, it highlights how citizen participation and decentralized governance have been critical to enabling the rapid and widespread diffusion of renewables in Germany, effectively turbocharging the Energiewende, and offers key lessons as countries the world over seek to accelerate their own energy transitions.

Amid a persistent affordability crisis, German political parties increasingly frame housing as the “new social question of our time.” But to what extent do parties at the national and regional levels also agree on solutions, given Germany's stark regional housing differences and regionalized housing policymaking? Using a novel dataset on party positions toward housing, we analyzed 361 party manifestos from national and Länder elections between 2000 and 2020 and find that housing has become an increasingly salient electoral issue over time. We also show that left-leaning parties prefer renter-oriented policies, while right-leaning parties favor homeownership. Finally, we find clear that housing salience varies significantly between eastern and western Länder.

German unification was initially hailed as a Glücksfall, a stroke of luck, but recent political and social developments suggest a more complex reality. This article examines the evolving East-West divide, the resurgence of identity politics, and the rise of populism, particularly in eastern Germany. It explores historical narratives shaping public discourse, including perceptions of East Germans as victims, perpetrators, or heroes. By situating these debates within broader temporal, spatial, and comparative contexts, the article challenges rigid national frameworks and emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary approaches to understanding Germany's post-unification transformations.

Since the 1980s, innovation has emerged as the dominant epistemic framework for imagining and engineering futures across much of Europe and America. This article investigates the cultural and political work performed by contemporary innovation discourse, using Germany's Future Strategy for Research and Innovation as a case study. The analysis draws on methods from literary studies and conceptual history to approach innovation as a mode of governance that is both historically contingent and symbolically charged. The article traces how innovation narratives are structured by a recurrent binary of promise and threat—projecting technological progress as national redemption while mobilizing anxieties over decline and obsolescence. The analysis reveals that, in the name of seemingly depoliticized foresight, innovation discourse legitimizes specific policy agendas, privileges particular technological trajectories, and reorders socio-economic priorities. By foregrounding the normative and rhetorical dimensions of innovation discourse, the article calls for a more critically attuned understanding of its political stakes and showcases the distinctive contributions that cultural analysis can offer to debates on science and technology policy.

A “crisis of democratic representation” has emerged as a pressing challenge in Germany and other Western democracies. The crisis is characterized by declining trust in institutions, the erosion of major parties, and the rise of populist movements that exploit feelings of political estrangement. This article examines the underlying causes—such as globalization, economic inequality, and cultural shifts—that contribute to fragmenting public spheres and diminishing political integration. It also explores constitutional perspectives on potential reforms, including direct democracy, citizen councils, and electoral law adjustments. The article concludes that these dynamics should be seen as part of a larger history on the adaptability of democratic representation.

The 75th anniversary of Germany's Grundgesetz highlights ongoing debates about statehood, unity, and territorial identity. Throughout its modern history, German statehood has been defined by evolving notions of sovereignty and flexible territorial arrangements. From the 1815 German Confederation to the Kaiserreich, Weimar Republic, and reunified Federal Republic, different legal frameworks have mediated shifting internal divisions and external boundaries. This article explores how geopolitical changes, constitutional settlements, and evolving concepts of national representation shaped Germany's development as a state. It spotlights key moments when sovereignty was contested or expanded through international treaties, plebiscites, and dynastic claims, revealing the enduring tensions between unity and diversity that have implications for Germany's federal structure and its role within Europe today.

Beginning in 2013, several German federal states, including North Rhine-Westphalia, Lower Saxony, and Hesse, introduced publicly funded religious instruction for Muslim students. Inertia gave way to action for two reasons. First, German political elites feared that a hands-off approach would leave religious education to unregulated religious leaders, increasing the potential for youth radicalization and undermining integration. Second, some policymakers believed that it was unfair to continue to deny Muslim students classes that Christian and Jewish students received as matter of course. This combination of fear and fairness motivated policymakers to experiment with unorthodox measures to enhance the standing of Muslim faith communities, so that they could partner with state governments in designing and implementing Islamic religious instruction in public schools. Bavaria did not follow the path of other states, despite having a large Muslim community. Fairness concerns were not as strong in Bavaria, suggesting that fear alone did not motivate action in the other cases.