Dwindling public support for democracy and our social system is often blamed on the population itself. The fact that this could also be due to the performance of the people’s representatives, the party structures and the basic structure of our current democracy is often not discussed.

Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly difficult for voters who are open to democracy to find a meaningful choice. There are various reasons for this:

• No party has existed for a long time.
  Visions of the future, strategies and political foresight
• Repeating like a prayer wheel that there are no alternatives leads to
  Radical loss of confidence
• Marginal differences between the party programs lead to the
  Arbitrariness and interchangeability
• Lack of performance targets and sanctions in the political process
  implementation make a mockery of the current democratic system

It makes little sense to choose something that does not promise a solution.

Having to elect representatives who constantly develop sanctions for the population, but who themselves operate in a sanction-free space, erodes basic trust in the current political system. As a politician of any party stature, only ever making demands of civil society without ever delivering will not lead to anything good in the long term.

A future-proof reform of our entire social structure
including the current political establishment, equipped for the 21st century.
This is becoming increasingly important and urgent.

Critics of the current democratic system are often portrayed as enemies of democracy, opponents of democracy or anti-democrats. People forget that factual, well-founded criticism points out grievances that should or must be remedied and can lead to an improved, more defensible democracy. In many possible forms of democracy, the system of rule does not have to be changed in order to achieve an improvement.

Criticizing the currently prevailing democracy does not mean being against democracy, but against its current form and implementation. The reflexive condemnation of the current policy towards its critics sheds light on the underlying mindset. A dangerous mindset.

Since the establishment of post-war democracy, no improvement, evolution or reform has been considered in politics, but rather the preservation of the status quo, however inadequate it may be. It is a means of this policy to glorify one’s own actions as the opposite of the actual ones. Which succeeds brilliantly in many parts. However, the longer entangled power structures are maintained, the more likely a Deep State, which is undemocratic per se, becomes.

The current Berlin democracy has no built-in protection mechanisms to prevent a deep state, a state within a state. No one checks measures implemented by the government in the gray area of executive and interpreted legislation, which are never reviewed and judged by the judiciary, indeed shy away from the light of publicity on the grounds of reasons of state.

Democracy does not mean making a cross only once in 4 years on a ballot paper that contains no alternative. Here, for once, the word “without alternatives” makes sense. It is frightening to see the accumulation of incompetence in our state, federal and European parliaments.

The assumption that it is not incompetence but malicious intent is no less disturbing. It is time to fulfill the promise of the founding fathers of the Bonn Republic: Reunification in free self-determination of the entire German people. This historic opportunity was deliberately squandered in 1990 and can only be rectified today with enormous effort.

The German people as a whole had neither determined the conditions for reunification, nor had they done so in free self-determination. It was a handful of Western representatives who set the conditions for the entire nation without a referendum or democratic legitimacy. Reunification was therefore neither free, nor self-determined, nor by the people. It was the most blatant failure of democracy in modern times.

However, it is not up to our parties in the corrupt party democracy, which is more interested in maintaining power than in the common good, to correct this. It is time to make German democracy more grassroots democratic. Important issues must be decided directly by the people and not just by their representatives.

The Swiss model of democracy provides a good example. It can also be more democratic.

A loss of reality can only occur where bubbles create protected spaces within a social structure that are disconnected from large parts of social reality.

In the 21st century, this is particularly true of the people’s representatives, who have as much in common with their own people as the French nobility did shortly before the Great Revolution – nothing.

On the one hand you face your potential voters during elections, on the other hand you ignore them as soon as the election is over. After that, patronage politics will be pursued with the rich and powerful. The people themselves only have an alibi function here.

How can such a situation arise within a democratic system, when this system is supposed to prevent exactly the situation described above?

Several factors should be mentioned here:

• Political influence is tied to the party dictate
• Politicians do not require any proof of performance / quality or even examinations
• Politicians are insufficiently trained for their actual job – influencing systems
• Political structures attract a certain type of person – the deceiver
• Understanding reality presupposes living in this reality. Power bubbles distort the sense of reality
• Day-to-day business ties up so many personal resources that those affected can’t see the wood for the trees
• Complicated-artificial legal/social systems require too much time and energy
• Practicality and effectiveness are not checked and not corrected and improved retrospectively