A recent survey commissioned by “Welt am Sonntag” reveals a complex and potentially divisive public response to remarks made by CDU leader Friedrich Merz concerning the visual impact of migration in German cities. The YouGov poll, conducted between October 24th and 27th with 2,343 participants, indicates a majority of Germans do not view Merz’s pronouncements as a transgression of accepted norms.
The survey found that 58% believe Merz’s statements simply articulate widely held sentiments, while 21% consider them a deliberate crossing of a political boundary, pushing the limits of acceptable discourse towards the political right. This perception is particularly stark along party lines: a resounding 82% of CDU and CSU supporters and 79% of AfD supporters do not perceive a taboo breach. Even within the SPD, a significant 50% share this view. Conversely, a clear majority of Green Party (65%) and Left Party (61%) adherents view the comments as a dangerous escalation of politically charged rhetoric.
Interestingly, the younger demographic (18-29 year olds) exhibits a more nuanced perspective, with only 35% agreeing that Merz’s words reflect common thoughts, compared to 38% who criticize the statement as a transgression. While older age groups consistently demonstrate higher levels of agreement with Merz’s sentiments – ranging from 62% to 69% – the dissenting voice remains a notable undercurrent, especially among younger voters.
Geographic location further shapes public perception. Residents of rural areas (60%) and suburban communities (63%) are less likely to view the comments as a breach of social norms. In contrast, city dwellers are split, with only 52% agreeing and a larger proportion (26%) viewing them as a politically problematic transgression.
The controversy stems from Merz’s initial October 14th statement, in which he acknowledged successes in reducing overall refugee numbers but lamented the continued “problem” visible “in the cityscape” and called for increased deportations. His subsequent defense, which referenced anecdotal observations about perceived nighttime issues, ignited a fierce debate, culminating in a more carefully crafted statement where Merz attempted to distinguish between long-term residents and those without permanent residency who do not integrate or adhere to societal norms.
The survey highlights a potential generational and geographic divide in the German public’s acceptance of increasingly assertive political messaging and raises questions about the impact of such statements on the broader discourse surrounding migration and integration within the country. The attempt to walk back the initial remarks with a more nuanced explanation has done little to quell the controversy, demonstrating the potency of the sentiment expressed and the challenge policymakers face in navigating this politically sensitive landscape.