GER politics thread

[Skybird]

I can only hope that the current situation will end well for us all, because the farmers are always sacrificed first on the chessboard.

Pawns. Chess only symbolically represents war, it does not really include human sacrifices.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

How much if any of this will or can be blamed on Merkel?
Or is it pure coincidence she is soon to be leaving the stage?

What can be blamed on Merkel?
The recession? I blame worldwide fuss with Trumponomics, and brexit influencing the economical condition. No local political reason here. And national debt in Germany is down to 64 percent, to below 2004 level.
B.t.w. as mentioned before two times, it really does not look like a "recession". There's still economical growth, if a bit less than predicted.

The reason for Merkel leaving as chancellor is more the annoyance between the CDU and CSU's front man Seehofer. Both being initially conservative parties, Merkel's CDU has adopted all the social democratic SPD's points of view and measures to deal with things, upsetting the real conservatives in her party, and the CSU. The SPD just cannot stand up and fight her, because Merkel always takes the wind out of their sails. I guess they are all sick and tired of her 13-year-long chancellorship..

Of course everything can be blamed on Merkel, question is whether accusations hold any water. Immigration.. is another field. But even there opinions differ.

[Jimbuna]

High-profile Germans plead with UK to stay in EUhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46918009

Some warm and comforting words in the letter but I can't help thinking that there will also be some opposition from within Germany regarding its contents.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Some warm and comforting words in the letter but I can't help thinking that there will also be some opposition from within Germany regarding its contents.

Why do you think that? There may be some haters as everywhere, but surely not the majority. It was not exactly Germany that wanted the UK to leave, nor the rest of the EU. You did it all by yourself. I hope there can still be friendship, afer all we had to accept your new course.

It was a bit "irritating" to see the war rhetorics of some brexiters, pulling out their sledgehammer with something like "We don't want you to like us or be friends, bugger off!"

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

What can be blamed on Merkel?
The recession? I blame worldwide fuss with Trumponomics, and brexit influencing the economical condition. No local political reason here. And national debt in Germany is down to 64 percent, to below 2004 level.
B.t.w. as mentioned before two times, it really does not look like a "recession". There's still economical growth, if a bit less than predicted.

The reason for Merkel leaving as chancellor is more the annoyance between the CDU and CSU's front man Seehofer. Both being initially conservative parties, Merkel's CDU has adopted all the social democratic SPD's points of view and measures to deal with things, upsetting the real conservatives in her party, and the CSU. The SPD just cannot stand up and fight her, because Merkel always takes the wind out of their sails. I guess they are all sick and tired of her 13-year-long chancellorship..

Of course everything can be blamed on Merkel, question is whether accusations hold any water. Immigration.. is another field. But even there opinions differ.

As so often, you just skim on the surface. And take everything on the surface for deep truth. You probably also assume that inflation is just 2.5%, implicvt debts will be solved in the near future, laws ands treaties are worth the paper they are printed on and will be followed by potlicians releasing them, and that every eleven minutes somebody falls in love via Parship. But i am a bit tired of calling you out on every single point only to see you skimming on as if nothing happened, ignoring it completely.



Its a plain simple world, the way you paint it in blue. Its the perfect world of an abstract theoreticist.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Why do you think that? There may be some haters as everywhere, but surely not the majority. It was not exactly Germany that wanted the UK to leave, nor the rest of the EU. You did it all by yourself. I hope there can still be friendship, afer all we had to accept your new course.

It was a bit "irritating" to see the war rhetorics of some brexiters, pulling out their sledgehammer with something like "We don't want you to like us or be friends, bugger off!"

Well, when this all ends whichever way I will always be one of those who hope for a continuation of friendship between the UK and Europe.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Well, when this all ends whichever way I will always be one of those who hope for a continuation of friendship between the UK and Europe.

Nah, this time we will invade you with the French and Poles on our side.




Seriously though I hope we can get things sorted out and still be close. There is no point in putting up artificial barriers for trade and travel.

[Skybird]

No, we let the Poles and French alone invade Britian, in our name and on our behalf.

Originally Posted by Skybird

Pawns. Chess only symbolically represents war, it does not really include human sacrifices.

I sincerely promise to continue serving with such mistakes.
This tremendously increases the audience value and the fun together.

[STEED]

Thanks guys for the info.

[Catfish]

Interesting online article in the FAZ (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) about the views of new BND (Federal Intelligence Service) head Bruno Kahl.
It seems international propaganda activity by autocrate systems, and shielding the eastern people from western information will be the coming number one threat.


Squeezed in by giants

by Reinhard Mueller, FAZ online, 19.1.2019


"It is a commonplace that the threat posed by liberal states is different today than it was twenty years ago. Rarely does the president of the Federal Intelligence Service, Bruno Kahl, comment publicly. So happened to conclude a series of discussions on "values" of the Hessian State Representative in Berlin. Kahl said the conflict between economically successful, authoritarian-repressive systems on the one hand and Western-liberal on the other has the potential to replace current asymmetric threats such as international terrorism and religious conflict as the biggest strategic challenge.

The ideological confrontation runs between constitutional, value-based democracies on the one hand, and emerging authoritarian social models on the other. The latter appeared attractive, since they are superficially stable, militarily strong and often very economically successful. The own society is "positively" demarcated from the West, which is discriminated against as "unstable" (financial crisis), "alienated" (migration), "decadent" (no own obligatory values) and "disintegrating" (Brexit).


And terrorism? Although the "territorial project" of the IS had failed. However, the BND sees a return of the IS to "classic" underground terrorist activities and network structures. The focus is also on Europe and Germany. "Bad news in this context," says Kahl, "is that the borders between terrorism and conventional crime are fluid: clans, militias and terrorist groups are profiteers of the moment in many regions: they are violent, ruthless and increasingly on the agenda successfully."
And he added: "The fact that the early and sudden withdrawal of the Americans from some of these problem regions contributes to the faster stabilization, one should doubly doubt that - even if you as a European and especially as a German otherwise has no good arguments, from the US to demand more and longer military missions."

With regard to cyberattacks, Kahl emphasized: "Even in Iran and in North Korea state hackers of the highest class act today." One observes an increasing intelligence presence in the "hacker underground".

Regarding the competition of the systems, Kahl said that China is impressed by the fact that it is building a gigantic new airport in Beijing in a very short time. At the same time, a year ago a German premium manufacturer announced that it wanted to better its advertising with the Dalai Lama he continues to sell cars in China. The German group has apologized and deleted the advertising.


The BND president sees another problem: while Western economies compete with powerful non-state actors - such as the international Internet giants - certain states with a systematic industrial policy are pushing their own big players such as Tencent or Alibaba into virtually all areas - especially in the technologies of the future, "Western democracies thus become sandwiched between the giants of capitalism and the giants of authoritarianism."

In this system conflict between constitutional, value-based democracies on the one hand, and modern, increasingly dictatorship-like autocracies on the other, we Germans and Europeans would have to ask ourselves the rather uncomfortable question of how we wanted to behave in the long term, said the BND president. "For example, we need to ask ourselves, self-critically, whether international cooperation should be promoted for its own sake, even if individual states only use the undeniable benefits of multilateralism to defend their own aggressive and autocratic policies at the expense of our free and democratic We also need to ask ourselves, "If we want to tolerate that individual state actors only superficially accept multilateral structures in order to undermine our liberal world order from the inside".
Moreover, today we should be careful that, given the isolationist attitude on the other side of the Atlantic, as overly uncritical multilateralists, we did not end up sacrificing precisely the multilateral world order that we actually want to defend and defend by leaving it to their enemies. For there are powerful states in the world today who "only support multilateralism as long as it benefits their aggressive interests."

And there you are again with the values. Kahl, the lawyer and Schauble confidant, emphasized that unlimited freedom meant nothing more than arbitrariness and anarchy. Who dreams of the ideal of unlimited freedom, he will certainly not find it in a "failed state". However, in a democratic state governed by law as well as absolute security can not be realized: "Any attempt to establish absolute security leads to dictatorship and terror in the medium term."


Shield terrorists from the outside world

Freedom rights, understood purely as state defense rights, can not, of course, serve as the basis of a state order, but rather they would be the gateway to anarchy. Accordingly, security also belongs to freedom. A fundamental right to security, which the Basic Law expressly does not know, can be derived, according to Kahl, from the classical declarations of human rights as well as early constitutions of the 19th century. He recalls the 1978 decision of the Federal Constitutional Court to deny contact, which allowed the state to completely shield detained RAF terrorists from the outside world. It states: "The security of the state as a constituted power of peace and order and the security of its population to be guaranteed by it are constitutional values, which are in the same rank with others and indispensable, because the institution state derives from them the actual and final justification . "

Kahl emphasized that he did not want to speak the word of isolationism. But even more dangerous, because the real interests are concealed, "is a value-free, purely power-oriented multilateralism that claims universal freedoms only as long as they benefit, but eliminate them as soon as they are no longer needed." The BND president considers it realistic to strive for "a multi-polar world order that is rule-based and which makes it attractive for all members of the international community to at least avoid wars".


Let's see how long he remains in power

[STEED]

I hear the euro army is on it's way now Germany and France signed agreement.

[Catfish]

^ Steed, in the moment, it is very unlikely
Google translate:
https://translate.google.com/transla...itik-1.4296345


The signed treaty is more about closer collaboration:

From the BBC:
"France and Germany agree to establish common positions and issue joint statements on major EU issues - formalising their existing co-operation. They also plan to act as a joint force at the United Nations.

From foreign policy to internal and external security, the two nations commit to coming up with common positions while seeking to bolster "Europe's capacity to act autonomously".
The two countries commit to:

• Deepening economic integration with a Franco-German "economic zone"
• Developing Europe's military capabilities, investing together to "fill gaps in capacity, thereby reinforcing" the EU and Nato
• The possibility of joint military deployments as well as a Franco-German defence and security council

For young people, there is agreement to focus on cultural exchanges and increase learning of each other's languages, with the aim of a Franco-German university.
There are also plans for closer cross-border links and greater "bilingualism" on both sides of the borders."


Of course
"If France and Germany are serious about an EU-wide army under a central command, they can thank Trump":
https://www.theguardian.com/business...-eu-army-trump

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by STEED

I hear the euro army is on it's way now Germany and France signed agreement.

If you mean the paper of Aachen - that is just the whistleing in the forest. A declaration of two very weak government leaders who get the boot at home.


The cooperation of Germany and France in terms of cooperating army units and shared manouver units, is overestimated, according to insiders being experience din this field. They say reality in no way meets what since years gets postulated to be already there.


On that interview with the BND chief, Germany currently has made it clear where its priorities lie, and these priorities are denial of reality. We care a lot for eliminating genders from our cultural definitaion o our species, we foster strong collective uniformism in mind and thoght and opinion and have labelled everything right of the far leanign left as rightwinged extremism, any sense of own, natural identity gets brandmarked as brutal selfishness, and economy lobby groups as well as ideological special interest groups tear the law and order state and and state reason apart. Monopolism rules - on top pof all, the state as the biggest monopolist of all, but not any less unfriendly just because it is the state.


The people - let all this happen and let all this getting done in their name, so i think they do not deserve anythign better. Thats justice.



The EU is putting itself under so much inner tensions that it must burst sooner or later. It is hopelessly exaggerating its own meaning and importance, its a playground for deranged characters unsuited for serving the public, the EU wants to be too much and thank God! can be only too little, a textbook example for over-ambitious hubris. The advanatge of Europe always was: innovation, innovation came form competition, competition came fro geographic separation. Technology-hostility especially in Germany, the demand of the EU to be a cultural Lehrmeister and re-designer of cultural identity is owed to the demand of fat cats to sunbath their egos in the light of a bigger organsiation they represent as a de facto one party system, and the Gleichschaltung of opinion and thinking about it, especially in Western state run media and here once again in the german mainstream media, cannot be overlooked, is obvious. Merkel'S policy of declaring anythign she claims as "without alternative" had destroyed the potlical spectrum and prevents any "democratic" discussion, has turned the parliament into a de facto one-party show with a strawman -like democratic legitimation like the other parties beside the SED in the GDR.



de Gaulle wanted the British not in the EEC, he vetoed their joinign twice, feared the economic influx from their economy. de gaulle also did not want this madness of a Eurpean superstate , he wanted instead a strong economic - and only economic! - cooperation, and an according framework for that. With that concept of an EU I wold have no big problems, like I agree to the concepot of the old EEC, despite its obvious, politically motivated dysbalanced economic distribution policies which led to unhealthy results (like every state-run sanctioning of free market and any state-propagated claim to plan the economy necessarily must do). The milk quotas, the butter mountains of the 70s and 80s., etc etc. But the EU fat cats dream of establishing a Sovjet-style regome that gives them so very uch own power and glory, or comare it to the role the KP plays in China - its a one party-dictatorship with an utmost corrupt family clan at the very top. The ammount of corruption in the eU is immense, and is helped by the fact that the holy grail of Wetsern systemn: voter'S decisions, get bypassed by biblical ammount of private lobbyism, leading to the circumstance that Brussel insiders say on one member of EU parliament there come 50-60 lobbyists who are additionally allowed, like on national government levels, to not only recommend la chnages on their behalf, but also to formulate them and let them beign turned into written rle by their own law agencies. The corruption of the intended design is complete. It cannot be reformed, for the actors will be against it to protect their own interests, and in generla net receivig state slive so very pefrectly of the status quo in which they can vote down net paying states. This leviathan cannot be talked into nice behaviour, every state never redcues itself, instead it always demands ever mor epower for itself. This leviathan must be waited to collapse under its own weight, suffocated by its own body mass. This is what happend to the two Roman empires after the divide, preparing them to be weak and unfit and self-paralysed so that they could no longe rresct to the challanges raised by foreign pwers from ebyoind their spheres of influence. When rome stopped to be potent enough reach into the affairs of other kingdoms and places, some of these later reached into Roman affairs, with the known results. I think the EU will go the same way, just in timelapse mode. The loss is not the loss of the eU, the loss is the wasted time that is not avialable to make our states fit for the tough competition with Russia, china, the US. Especialyl the US now has a technolgical lead over Europe that I think cannot be caught up with anymore. The German hostility to technology does not help, of course. Not to mention that in many fields of new tehcnolgies we are a development country. Albania has more stable internet, than Germany. Our rail is a mess, our airports cant be build, we clad buoldings and ignore the immense encironmental costs of that but stick with the cliche that it actually helps the environment, we have illusions about e-mobility and fade out the dirty costs of pruducing e-cars and batteries, and when we make disocveries in new cell techcnolgy, we do not dare to turn it itno a profit-generating business idea, no: we share it for free so that all mankind shall benefot from it, follow out golden ways and thnaks us for it, theit thankfulness is our payment. And above all we simply ignore that without bringing down global population tremedosukly, all this hectic acting will make no difference. WE ARE TOO MANY.



German priorities 2019:

LINK

[Catfish]

^ or, in one word: no.