Michael Lüders, Spitzenkandidat des BSW | Berlin-Wahl 2026 - Jung & Naiv: Folge 847

Summary

Tilo Jung interviews Michael Lüders, the BSW’s co-lead candidate with Alexander King for Berlin’s 2026 state election. Lüders says he entered politics after years as a writer because he wanted to help change what he sees as a worsening political situation. He expects the BSW to be an opposition party in Berlin, but says it would aim to influence policy and hold the government to account.

The BSW and its internal disputes

• Lüders describes the BSW as a young party that has made serious mistakes. He calls the decision to enter a coalition with the CDU in Thuringia a major error and says the party has paid a high price for it.
• On the dispute over Thuringian premier Mario Voigt’s doctoral thesis, Lüders says the BSW leadership considers the coalition untenable if Voigt remains in office after the university’s plagiarism finding. He defends the party’s position as a response to that finding, while Jung questions the timing and the federal party’s involvement in state-level affairs.
• Lüders rejects the claim that the BSW leadership is a cult. He reacts angrily to repeated questions about whether the party is “a sect” and says he cannot speak for other party members.
• Jung challenges Lüders over a Berlin BSW “15-point” paper found online. Lüders says it was not adopted as the party’s platform, was mistakenly left on the website and is no longer relevant. He identifies the official 66-page program as the valid document. The interview highlights differences and gaps between the two, including on housing and integration.
• Asked about the BSW’s January 2025 vote with the CDU/CSU and AfD on asylum restrictions, Lüders calls it a serious political mistake that damaged the party’s credibility and says he does not expect it to happen again.

The AfD and the possibility of an AfD-led government

• Lüders says the BSW in Saxony-Anhalt should not choose either an AfD or CDU candidate for premier if there is no clear majority. He proposes seeking a non-party candidate instead.
• Jung presses him on whether BSW abstentions in a later round could help an AfD candidate take office. Lüders disputes the premise that this outcome will arise and argues that treating support for a CDU candidate as the only alternative would repeat the failed “firewall” strategy.
• Lüders says the AfD has become strong because established parties have failed voters, especially in eastern Germany. He also says the AfD is not a real alternative, criticizing its neoliberal economic agenda and support for higher military spending.
• He declines to say that the AfD is necessarily more dangerous than established parties. Instead, he focuses on what he sees as their economic failures, restrictions on public debate and damage to social welfare. Jung repeatedly asks him to distinguish those criticisms from the threat posed by a far-right party.

Berlin policy positions

• Housing: Lüders blames the SPD and the former PDS/Left Party for selling large numbers of publicly owned apartments cheaply in the 2000s. He says this opened the market to major investors and helped drive up costs. He supports the 2021 referendum on socializing large housing companies’ holdings, though Jung notes that the official election program does not clearly specify socialization as the implementation mechanism. Lüders proposes building 6,000 socially bound apartments a year and taking action against speculative vacancies and short-term rentals.
• Policing and safety: Lüders supports a properly equipped police force, but argues that police alone cannot solve insecurity caused by social inequality. He says officers responsible for unjustified violence should face consequences, including for conduct at demonstrations.
• Unemployment: Lüders cites high unemployment alongside about 20,000 vacancies, attributing the mismatch partly to qualification gaps and difficulties recognizing foreign credentials. He calls for more vocational training, stronger support for skilled trades and a stronger industrial base.
• Integration: Lüders says integration requires effort from both newcomers and society, including language learning, education, housing and access to work. He supports integration-course opportunities, but initially dismisses the question of what Berlin itself should provide as too general. Later, he agrees that the receiving society needs the capacity and infrastructure to support people.
• Climate and transport: Lüders is sceptical that Berlin can control climate change by itself and does not commit to a firm city target, though he accepts 2045 as an ideal. He supports expanding public transport and reducing car traffic where practical, while arguing that people in outer districts and tradespeople still need access to cars. He favours pragmatic changes and opposes imposing them without adequate alternatives.
• Arms production: Lüders says arms production can be justified for national defence, but objects to Berlin factories shifting from civilian manufacturing to weapons production for international conflicts. He is particularly critical of cooperation with Israeli arms companies.
• Public broadcasting: Lüders supports reforming public media, reducing political influence and making governing bodies more representative of society. A questioner challenges the BSW program’s suggestion of using a lottery to select representatives, arguing that this may not produce a socially representative body. Lüders says the idea should be reconsidered.

Foreign policy and campaign material

• Lüders criticizes Germany’s dependence on US foreign-policy priorities, sanctions on Russia and what he sees as the economic damage caused by cutting off Russian energy. He says sanctions against Israel may be justified, citing the war in Gaza, international-law concerns and German arms exports to Israel.
• He describes the AI-generated BSW poster portraying Volodymyr Zelensky and other leaders amid flying money as criticism of the billions sent to Ukraine without adequate accounting. Jung raises concerns that the imagery could be read as antisemitic because Zelensky is Jewish; Lüders rejects that interpretation.
• On Nord Stream, Lüders disputes Jung’s account of the pipeline’s shutdown and destruction. He argues that Russian gas flows were halted after sanctions before the pipelines were blown up. Their exchange does not resolve the disagreement.

Other points

Lüders denies that his repeated attempts to run for elected office are motivated by parliamentary benefits. He says he is retired, can support himself on his pension and wants to contribute to the party rather than become a career politician. Jung questions this claim by pointing to his successive candidacies for European, federal and state parliaments.

In response to an audience question about the free mandate, Lüders supports greater public participation on major issues while maintaining that elected representatives should consult affected people and their party. He also says he would approach potential parliamentary work by speaking directly with those involved and holding the government to account.

Presenters and contributors: Tilo Jung (interviewer); Michael Lüders (guest); Hans Link (audience-question segment).