Beggars Can’t Be Choosey?

The German political election process was a concept that I did not quite understand until we simulated it. After 2 full class periods of speeches, debates, and deliberations the idea became much more concrete–take a stance but be flexible. The Green Party became the deciding factor in the coalition, not because it had a large representation, but because it did not. Let me explain. No one wanted to share power with the largest party in fear of being monopolized–the proposition of “We have chancellorship, you take all the cabinet position” sounds quite preposterous.

Power in a coalition must be shared, thus greed does not play in well. Giving up cabinet positions is not as difficult as one might assume, for if your party has a similar view of the same position, let’s take education for example, then that position allocation is not as pertinent for your group to have than one where you may differ on ideas. It is better to have one cabinet position on a topic that you don’t agree on, than 2 positions where you share similar interests. It is for this reason that the Green party was able to obtain 2 seats in the cabinet—they ensured their coalition partners that they has similar views on education—and essentially it was assumed that they would receive he environmental position if they were to have any at all.

The point is, once elected, your role is not to only provide for those that voted you in, but to manage to cooperate with those who will win you the next election—the others vying for the same positions. If you agree to represent them as well, your chances of being elected into a higher position are far greater. Sadly for the FDP, they had to learn their lessons the hard way.