In today's neoliberal capitalism, we observe two competing political projects. They are vying for hegemony and supremacy. At first glance, their plans for dealing with the global multiple crises appear distinct and their values diametrically opposed. The bourgeois-liberal project of "green" modernization stands against an openly authoritarian, at times, fascist project of fossil backwardness. The former wants to modernize capitalism with a new accumulation regime, i.e. with new technologies, changed production methods and flexible working conditions, in order to reconcile it with the migration society and climate protection. The latter relentlessly clings to the old industrial society and aims to turn the clock back decades in socio-political terms. It aggressively defends the unequal distribution of means of production and resources between North and South, citizens and immigrants and between genders.
At second glance, there is a great deal of overlap between these two hegemonic projects. Both want to preserve the capitalist mode of production and way of life, as well as the global imperialist relations of exploitation. Both are intertwined with neoliberalism in different forms. The transitions are fluid and political actors move between the lines, complicating clear affiliations.
As a result of the strong right-wing formation of recent years, a modernized fortress capitalism emerges as a compromise between these two capitalist hegemonic projects. It aggressively distances itself from the outside world and increasingly resorts to an authoritarian form of politics on the inside. At the same time, there are still concessions to a liberal way of life and the rules of parliamentary democracy continue to apply. There are signs of a society that undertakes just as much climate protection and modernization as is feasible without major resistance from fossil capital and its henchmen. At present, there is no strong left-wing bloc that can intervene in this balance of power - but this can not and must not remain the case. To intervene effectively, we need an understanding of the similarities and differences between the supposedly green-progressive and reactionary projects.
The green modernization
The project of "green capitalism" promises to successfully solve the climate crisis through ecological modernization and at the same time open up new profit opportunities. Through this approach, the capitalist way of producing and living could be maintained in the long term and the ecological foundations of life would be preserved. The core of this false promise is to decouple economic growth from resource consumption through technological progress and ecological structural change. The project of green modernization therefore does not have to ignore or completely deny the causes and consequences of the climate crisis, as the right-wing project does. For this reason, international institutions such as the UN, WTO and EU predominantly support this perspective.
In the capitalist centers of Western Europe and North America, the project of green modernization is closely linked to "progressive" neoliberalism. Agreement is primarily achieved through recognition policies that take up aspects of demands coming from social movements, but weaken and reinterpret them in a way that they are compatible with the capitalist logic of exploitation. Thus, modern capitalism portrays itself as a defender of individual liberties and liberal values, which play a central role in the self-image of the green-progressive bloc.
However, the rescue of the capitalist narrative of progress into the 21st century cannot work in practice: A system that is fundamentally built on the maximization of profit and permanent growth must also subject natural resources to private control. It cannot respect ecological and planetary boundaries. The decoupling of economic growth and resource consumption remains a theoretical notion that does not stand up to empirical scrutiny. There is no and there cannot be a truly green capitalism.
The defense of liberal values and the supposed progressive politics in this project remain hollow. After all, capitalism and the imperial way of life cannot be maintained without closed borders, racist inequality, armament and repression. This stands even more true in light of the already inevitable consequences of the climate crisis.
The current failure of the German government to meet its own minimal standards clearly demonstrates this. Small improvements that cost nothing, such as the abolition of §219a, or half-hearted liberalizations of citizenship law are contrasted with a practice of closed borders, social budget cuts and the assertion of Germany as a dominant political power. Hidden behind phrases such as "European solidarity", the right to asylum is undermined. There is little left of "feminist foreign policy" apart from arms deals with dictatorships. Climate targets are missed year after year and the fossil fuel infrastructure expands.
Any hopes of a green modernization of capitalism are therefore in vain. A real socio-ecological transformation does not come from above but must be anti-capitalist.
The formation of the right
Conservatives and market radicals, right-wing and even fascist forces have formed an independent right-wing project - in varying constellations depending on the country - that fiercely competes for hegemony with the progressive-green project. In Germany, this development has been delayed but has now fully arrived with the electoral successes of the AfD and the CDU's shift to the right under their current leader Friedrich Merz.
Despite the multiple crises and increasing insecurity, the right-wing project promises that everything can remain as it is through a mixture of isolationism, climate denial and the defense of patriarchal privileges. For this false promise of stability, the racist, sexist, anti-semitic and anti-queer attitudes that have always existed in the population are purposefully mobilized and radicalized. In traditional and social media, the right wing is presenting itself as a supposedly resistant voice. They benefit from the fact that large parts of the media and party landscape adopt right-wing narratives, thereby normalizing their misanthropic positions.
After the “summer of migration” in 2015, the main focus was on racist agitation. In recent years, an anti-feminist and queer-hostile "culture war" has also gained importance. In this attempt to roll back the progressive, socio-political achievements of 1968, anti-semitic undertones become ever louder. As a result, a right-wing social bloc was created and broadened across opposing interests.
In Germany, it is the AfD that plays the central role in organizing this right-wing bloc. It has been able to establish itself as a right-wing party with a solid voter base, expand the financing of right-wing structures and network the right-wing on a national and international level. The AfD is a rallying point for extreme right-wing actors and an interface to openly activist neo-Nazis. At the same time, the transitions to parts of the established conservative parties and media become increasingly fluid. The likelihood of parliamentary alliances and even government participation grows.
Neoliberals and right-wingers do not merely share individual ideological ideas. Their cooperation goes beyond temporary alliances. This was particularly evident with the corona-denying “Querdenker*innen” (broad movement of “critics” that started protesting against the measures taken against the Covid pandemic and soon included protests against “woke” politics. The literal translation is lateral/unconventional thinkers). Here, neoliberal ideology takes an authoritarian turn: self-centeredness and an individualistic understanding of freedom lead to aggression against any collective solidarity. In this way, the diffuse union of authoritarian libertarians and conspiracy theorists has expanded the basis for the right-wing project. In addition, religious fundamentalists have been able to greatly expand their structures in recent years and are increasingly forming alliances with parts of the right-wing bloc.
The threat posed by the right-wing authoritarian project begins long before the AfD joins the government. The racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic, queer and trans-hostile fantasies of violence do not remain in the virtual space of social media but lead to real, often deadly violence. This was clearly demonstrated by the murders in Halle in 2019 and Hanau in 2020. The police, secret services and military remain a magnet for right-wing authoritarian characters. They are breeding grounds for racism and Nazi terrorism. Right-wing networks still exist in the German security apparatus, which has never been consistently denazified, posing a major threat to migrants in particular. The state can therefore not be relied upon to fight right-wing structures. It barely shows initiative unless it deems its monopoly on the use of force threatened. For anything else, a strong anti-fascist movement would have to force the state.
Despite the self-righteous portrayal of Germany as a country that has learned from history and is now reformed, anti-Semitism comes from the "center of society". It is neither reducible to the past nor an isolated case, nor is it a problem imported through migration. Anti-Semitic conspiracy narratives form ideological bridges from the extreme right to the so-called “Querdenker”, from reactionaries to parts of the peace movement.
In Eastern Germany in particular, right-wing and fascist structures, parties and individuals are deeply rooted in society, while a (leftist) liberal civil society often barely exists. The threat of a regional right-wing hegemony is already a reality in many areas. One explanation for this is the experience of decline and devaluation that many citizens of East Germany had since 1989. The far right was able to cleverly build on this with a politics tailored to the East. The state-based anti-fascism of the East German Regime was, although in a different fashion, just as superficial as it was in the West. Racism and authoritarianism lived on beneath the surface of socialism and internationalism. After the collapse of the DDR, there was understandable skepticism towards left-wing positions and organizations. This was another reason why the right had it relatively easy in East Germany. Today, we have to take these particularities into account when formulating a strategy and practice for our anti-fascist politics.
The threat from the right-wing authoritarian bloc is acute and real. Broad anti-fascist alliances are necessary to counter this. At the same time, the green-progressive project itself is part of the problem because it allows itself to be driven by the right. Effective anti-fascism only works in the long term with a left-wing, anti-capitalist perspective.