[OPINION] Poverty has no name, but the debate over it speaks volumes about society

Yasemin Aydın*

Names carry meaning. They tell stories of origin, belonging, history. And in times of political polarization, they are often turned into tools, symbols that define who is perceived as part of society, and who stands outside.

In Germany this dynamic has resurfaced in a familiar form. The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) recently demanded access to the first names of individuals receiving social welfare, known as “Bürgergeld.” Officially framed as a statistical inquiry, the underlying narrative was unmistakable: to link social hardship to migration, to imply that poverty is driven by cultural difference.

The actual data contradicted this claim. The most common names among welfare recipients were Andreas, Thomas, Michael, names deeply rooted in the German mainstream.

Still, the incident cannot be dismissed as an isolated event. It reflects a broader pattern visible across many democracies: reframing structural problems as questions of identity.

The timing is telling. In the recent European elections, the AfD achieved over 15 percent of the national vote, finishing second. Their support grew, particularly among young voters, despite, or perhaps because of, radical rhetoric and repeated scandals. This political momentum reveals deeper undercurrents: economic uncertainty, frustration with institutions and the appeal of seemingly clear explanations for complex problems.

Social psychology offers insights into this process. Polish social psychologist Henri Tajfel’s (1979) research shows that in times of uncertainty, individuals are drawn to simplified group distinctions. Classifying, labeling and assigning blame provides people with a sense of clarity and control amid ambiguity.

Yet societies are not defined by fixed boundaries. As US American anthropologist Clifford Geertz (1973) described, communities are held together by “webs of meaning,” networks of shared narratives, daily interactions and negotiated belonging. Reducing such complexity to names or origins weakens those foundations.

Germany’s recent debate over welfare recipients’ names is not unique. Similar tendencies are visible in many contexts, including in Turkey, where I come from. There, too, economic hardship has often been externalized, attributed to minorities, migrants or dissenting groups rather than addressed through structural reform. The consequences are predictable: rising polarization, declining trust and social fragmentation.

Stigma, as Canadian-born American sociologist Erving Goffman (1963) explained, functions precisely through these mechanisms. By turning individuals or groups into symbols of broader anxieties, it simplifies reality, but deepens divisions.

The current data from Germany dismantles the narrative that poverty belongs to one cultural group. Poverty is structural. It emerges from systemic factors: education gaps, labor market inequalities and fragile social safety nets. As John Berry’s (1997) research on intercultural relations shows, social resilience depends not on exclusion but on meaningful participation, equitable policies and a shared sense of fairness.

The AfD’s strategy is part of a larger trend: redirecting public frustration away from systemic challenges and toward cultural fault lines. This provides temporary political gain but weakens society’s capacity for constructive dialogue and problem-solving.

At its core, the question is not about names but about how societies understand vulnerability. Economic hardship, marginalization and social insecurity affect individuals across cultural, linguistic and national backgrounds. Attempts to politicize these realities through simplistic identity markers distract from meaningful solutions.

Poverty, in reality, has no name. But the debates constructed around it reveal a great deal about how societies navigate fear, uncertainty and belonging.

Recognizing that complexity is essential, not only to resist reductive narratives but to foster the inclusive, stable and just societies needed to face today’s challenges.

*Yasemin Aydın is a social anthropologist and social psychologist in Germany.