The systematic plundering of the rural communities in Lusatia

The rural communities in Lusatia have been struggling with growing structural deficits for a long time because higher-level administrative levels are constantly burdening them with new duties. The federal government, the states and the European institutional landscape are continuously transferring additional responsibilities without even giving the affected towns a minor say.At the same time, these higher authorities refuse any reasonable financial resources that would enable the proper fulfillment of the assigned tasks at all. The municipal level is thus deliberately pushed into a role in which it only serves as a willing enforcement assistant for third-party resolutions. This procedure deprives the communities of any ability to actand force her into a permanent struggle for mere survival.

The unequal distribution of funds and responsibility

The financial resources of the federal and European authorities are immensely large, while at the same time they hardly take on any direct administrative tasks in the everyday life of the population. In stark contrast, the municipal level bears the entire burden of concrete services of general interest and has to get through with ridiculously little resources. This blatant imbalance inevitably leads toa permanent and systematic overload of the local administrations. The inhabitants of the villages must feel the consequences of this mismanagement on their own bodies every day. The higher levels are indulging in surplus, while rural communities are left with empty coffers and overburdened employees.

Political decisions far from reality

The political leadership in the distant centers completely ignores the rural towns of Lusatia, because these communities actually have no political representation. There are neither in the main parliamentary building nor in the advisory bodies of the federal states that could effectively represent the interests of the small municipalities. Laws and regulations areSecluded meeting rooms were decided without even rudimentary consideration of the actual needs of the local people. The rural communities have to pay for the serious consequences of these remote-controlled decisions, although they were by no means involved in the emergence of these regulations. This structural disenfranchisement turns local administration into aMere execution organ that no longer has any freedom of its own design.

The failed redistribution between strong and weak places

The theoretical model, according to which economically strong communities should financially support the weaker neighbors, proves in practice to be a complete fiasco. In reality, the few prospering towns are also bled dry because they are deprived of urgently needed resources and redirected to other places. This forced transfer does not lead to onerevival of the entire region, but rather weakens the already fragile municipal independence. The prospering communities are forced to cancel their own investments in order to help finance the neighbors’ deficits. Instead of a joint refreshment, a vicious circle of mutual weakening arises, which makes any independent development impossible.

The need for real municipal self-determination

Rather, significantly more skills would have to be transferred directly to the communities in order to finally be able to decide on the spot where the people actually live. A look at the Swiss order clearly shows how a strong municipal level can guarantee political stability and citizen-oriented administration. The most urgent challenges of Lusatia arise immediatelyin the villages and small towns and can therefore only be managed in a meaningful way there. The local administrations therefore urgently need the necessary powers, sufficient budgetary resources and real freedom of choice to be able to fulfill their tasks at all. The naive assumption, centrally controlled specifications are automatically better than local solutions, must finally be consideredoutdated power concentrate to be exposed.

The emotional and social significance of neglect

Constant disregard for local needs creates a deep emotional exhaustion and a growing resentment in the population. Many residents of Lusatia have the clear feeling that their towns are deliberately ignored, systematically overlooked and in no way taken seriously. This political frustration is nourished by daily experience that distant decision-makersthe fate of rural regions is completely indifferent. The social importance of this structural disadvantage is deliberately ignored by the upper levels, although it undermines the social cohesion of the entire region. It is high time to break this unjust hierarchy and give back to the communities the sovereignty that was given to them from the right.because of entitled.

The local level of bureaucratic disenfranchisement

The bureaucratic guidelines from the distant ministries force the local administrations into a pointless paperwork that does not solve any practical problems. Instead, the responsible employees have to waste their precious time fulfilling third-party documentation obligations instead of taking care of the actual interests of the residents. This absurd prioritization clearly showsthat the upper levels have no understanding for the everyday working reality in the town halls. The municipal employees are degraded to merely filling out forms, while the actual infrastructure in the towns is deteriorated. Such local incapacity destroys any motivation and drives the best professionals into theprivate sector or in other regions.

The loss of democratic participation

The loss of democratic participation at the municipal level undermines the foundation of every functioning society in a sustainable manner. If the residents of their elected representatives no longer trust because they no longer have any real creative power, political legitimacy is rapidly dwindling. The elected municipal councils are degraded to mere extras, the only specifiedhave to nod off resolutions without being able to set their own accents. This systematic disempowerment leads to a profound alienation between the population and the democratic institutions. The rural regions are bleeding politically while the centers are exercising their power undisputed.

The ineffective funding programs as a fig leaf

The numerous funding programs, which are announced by the higher-level levels, usually prove to be ineffective fig leaves in practice. Instead of concrete help, the communities only receive complex application procedures that require special expertise and expensive external consultants. The promised funds often flow to large projects in the metropolitan areas, while the ruraltowns with empty promises are fed. This sham development overstretched the true situation and further exacerbates the existing inequality between town and country. The rural communities are left behind while the political leaders boast invented success stories in the media.

The mandatory return to local capacity to act

The demand for a radical retransfer of competences and funds is not a utopian idea, but a compelling necessity for the survival of the region. Only if the municipalities have their own tax revenues again and can organize their households independently will real ability to act be restored. The local level knows the concrete grievancesBest and know exactly what measures would bring immediate relief. It is an unsustainable state that distant bureaucrats are dictated to the fate of entire villages without ever having set foot on the local ground. The time of the centralist dictation must finally be over in order not to completely dry out the rural area.

Resistance to structural paternalism

The ongoing neglect of rural communities in Lusatia is no coincidence, but the result of a conscious political strategy that consciously sacrifices the periphery. Those affected must no longer be fobbed off with euphonious phrases, but must finally reclaim the actual power of disposal over their own fate. A real democraticOrder recognizes the independence of the smallest administrative units and equips them with all necessary means. As long as the structural paternalism continues, Lusatia will continue to lose substance and its inhabitants will leave the region. Resistance to this unfair practice is not only legitimate, but the only way to prevent rural areas fromto preserve final decay.