German Politicians will bend the knee to American Politicians. Germany will never be nothing more than a stop-gap to be used as cannon fodder.You fought you lost and your country is nothing more than a piece of property that belongs to NATO. To use as it wishes. Leave while you can or die where you stand. Hell Martha's Vineyard has its own underwater sub pens. Hello anyone that has a Nuclear torpedo.Please don't let them escape.

A trip through AfD country.

https://www-focus-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Are these people all Nazis...? Hardly.

Were all people nazis in 1933? Some never learn.
The goal to destroy and fight democracy is maybe not written in the AfD's party book, but you hear exactly that from a lot of their leaders.
I am sure their party doctrine does not lie of course, just like Hitler's didn't.

That was not what the article was about.

The party has a Nazi wing. It is influential, it grew since it hijacked the party from its founder. But the party also collects many other opinions, not just Nazis.

Some of its voters may be Nazis. Some. Especially those who saw bigger chance in the AfD and no longer in the NPD.

And even if the Nazi wing over the years would become the openly dominant decision maker in the party - I still do nit line p with the othe roartgies, that much pissed I am by them. And I HATE Nazis. But it seems I hate some others as much.

But most voter,s I simply clkaim that so, aer eno Nazis at all, are just people who arte pissed by the destruction done by the parties in office right now. The CDU today is simply green-left. It is not what it once stood for by claim and understanding. The moderate conservatives find no home in it any more. And they moved to the only alternative there is - the AfD. The AfD collect many of those who got exorcised by Merkel, and the nee dof the CDU today form coaltiions with the Greens, which makes the CDu so far green- and left lenaign that it now is. Or would you tlel me the CDU is an altertnative to the Ampelkoalition? I would disagree - I do not see the differences to understand it as an alternative.

And many people are pissed by it, are completely pissed, and this is no longer just the Eastgermans - it has already reached into the Western states as well. The coalition does so much carnage against Germany and the Germans, that it necessrily rives peope to the AfD. An d the CDU als helps in this becasue the CDU refuses to be an alternative. Merz has failed. Wüst is the continuation of Merkel. Long time people escpaed this drama by not voting, like I have chosen for all my life long. But many of these people, me included, see that as no longer an option. People see that the damage gets done nevertheless. So the move and agree to now supporit the only party that holds an inherent promise to confront and maybe damage these established parties.

I, and many others as well, see the established parties no logner as the lesser evil. And say what you want: the damage they do is done by them, not the AfD.

https://youtu.be/GMjyvdBLHDc

:D ^You get what I mean...?

As I wrote in the France thread, Wagenknecht's new party will take voters away from the AfD. She is popular with many AfD voters. She will weaken the SED and the AfD. But not with my vote's help.

Kai, allein daß ich nach 38 Jahren erwäge, erstmals (!) überhaupt in meinem Leben beim nächsten Mal zu wählen, sollte Hinweis genug sein, wie stinksauer ich bin. Ich habe doch immer die Wahlverweigerung gepredigt! Und die AfD ist wirklich eine Dreckspartei, die ich zum Kotzen finde - da wähle ich doch lieber die als das noch schlimmere Übel!

Fight fire with fire, all that.

German universities.

https://www-tagesspiegel-de.translat..._x_tr_pto=wapp

(click the left option "Weiter mit Werbung").

If the situation is so dire, why not use the third of the estimated needed funds proposed for "climate policy upgrades" to repair the most necessary damage to the building's physical foundation? We can afford luxuries when the fundamentals are back in place. But they are not, and probably never will be again.

The Green's recipe is als always the same: ever increase debts, do ever more on credit. Money means nothing. Not that the other parties are different, but the Greens have an especially pathologic relation to money.

The NZZ on the AfD. I give the attempted Google-translator-link and, because I am not certain that it works, the German link as well.

https://www.nzz.ch/international/auf...&_x_tr_sl=auto

https://www.nzz.ch/international/auf...ark-ld.1745885

In so much concentrated denial of reality I, as a former psychologist, definitely recognize a considerable degree of d psychiatrically relevant psychopathology. "Tichy's Einblicke" writes:

The cabinet has again postponed the self-determination law. The Ministry of the Interior has concerns. These show how the ministers involved, Lisa Paus and Marco Buschmann, are fighting reality and reason.

Lisa Paus (Greens, Minister of Family Affairs) and Marco Buschmann (FDP, Minister of Justice) have achieved something great. Something that opens up a career in the PR industry for them after their time as politicians: they have made Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) look like the realist in Olaf Scholz's (SPD) cabinet. That's because, as Der Spiegel reports, she has put a stop for the time being to the self-determination law that the government actually wanted to pass before the summer break.

The Self-Determination Act is intended to facilitate the official gender change. If Andreas wants to become Andrea, he no longer needs any biological requirements. An entry in the registry office is sufficient. Whoever then still calls him Andreas, Paus and Buschmann want to have the public prosecutor prosecute him and impose penalties that threaten his existence. Even if the perpetrators are Andreas' children.

But if Andreas has a criminal record, if there is even a warrant out for his arrest, or if he is registered as the owner of a weapon, then the authorities should also know this information about Andrea. One would think. Should even be self-evident. But apparently not in the draft law by Paus and Buschmann, as reported by Der Spiegel.

To remember the old name and the former identity want Paus and Buschmann as described under penalty. Only in exceptional cases should these be allowed to be disclosed and examined. That would go so far that the forty times previously convicted violent offender Andreas, may define himself as pacifist Andrea. Whoever says otherwise is homophobic. And whoever even wants to execute Andrea's arrest warrant for tax evasion is misanthropic. Because with the self-determination law the felt identity is to apply - no longer the biological one.

This obviously went too far for Faeser (Minister of the Interior). However, this is not the first reality to thwart the self-determination law. Initially, it was the FDP that expressed concerns. It wanted to let the domestic law continue to apply. If Andreas as Andrea wants to show her penis in the women's sauna, the owner should not be prosecuted as a homophobic hate criminal if he wants to keep Andrea outside.

But something as private as a house right goes too far for the green minister Paus. If Andrea and her penis want to go into a women's sauna, it would be transphobic to prevent them from doing so. That would even apply to women's shelters. Or in the given case for women's prisons. That Andreas could abuse the self-determination law, Paus thinks is an absurd idea, as she told the Taz: "That's fuelling fears that have nothing to do with reality."

But reality and Paus are no longer real friends. Shortly after the Green minister spoke to Taz, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD) vetoed the self-determination bill. Yes, if Andrea and her penis want to be a woman, it would be transphobic and criminal to doubt that. Unless, of course, a war broke out. Then criminal transphobia would become a reason of state in one fell swoop and Andrea would have to go to the front - perceived identity or not. Complete with rifle.

Paus and Buschmann now have as much time over the summer as Wile. E. Coyote to set a new trap for reality with the next bill. Should be fun to see Roadrunner reality beat her next bargain. If she doesn't succeed, Andrea and her penis will end up in the women's shelter instead - beep, beep.


Meine Fresse... I often think Putin has attacked the wrong country. :o Irrenanstalt. Total bekloppt.

https://www.tichyseinblick.de/daili-...aus-realitaet/

Germany pays Intel subsidies worth 60% of the construction costs for a chip factory in Germany. 10 billion Euros. That means each of the 3000 promised jobs costs 3 million in subsidies.

Further, that a factory is located in a country does not mean that the company owning it sells the products of that factory in the country it is located in. Intel can decide differently. In times of shortages of chips for example the US government may intervene. Or other countries pay better prices for chips.



The profits will go out of Germany. The risks will all be at the cost of the German tax cattle. Because stupid German politicians do not know the stuff they endlessly play around with. And havge no sense of responsibility.


This deal is another evidence for that nobody in this carricature of a government has a clue of sound economics. And of many other things as well.

https://www-novo--argumente-com.tran..._x_tr_pto=wapp


Click "Ich unterstütze bereits".

As of this Wednesday (July 12, 2023), the average German is working for his or her own pocketbook.
The average burden of taxes and duties on German employees will fall slightly to 52.7 percent of gross income in 2023. Lets celebrate - not.



52.7% - I already could vomit poison and bile again. Are people really sure that feudalism and servitude have really been abolished?

^ well i hear you.
It was 10 percent of tributes in the middle ages, so things really have improved :D

I will still not vote for the AfD. Or for the "Die Linke".

Baerbock is so full of herself about this, but the new Ger,man "Nartional strategy" imo is a failure when I red about it when it was published some days ago. Its a list of shallow phrases and empty holes. The work of naive laymen. The NZZ commented with this:
-----------------------
Germany's National Security Strategy demonstrates strategic naiveté. The roles of the Bundeswehr, the Foreign Service and the Federal Intelligence Service are not defined.

Peace is based on power. It prevails when nations do not fight each other by military means. The strategic question must be how supranational society can develop and international law be strengthened.

After the end of the Second World War, Thomas Mann described the Germans' relationship to the world as "abstract and mystical". This was at a time when Germans were just awakening from hubris and loss of compass. A good twenty years after the lost war, Helmut Schmidt spoke of the "necessity of scientific-rational reflection on foreign policy and security issues" and of the Germans' difficult relationship with strategy.

When Chancellor Olaf Scholz and half his cabinet recently presented the new National Security Strategy (NSS), the self-praise could not have been more pithy: "We've done a great job."

In fact, however, the National Security Strategy raises more questions than it answers. First of all, it is an attempt to describe security threats among the ministries from the perspective of the federal government. Departmental thinking has always been the big brake in Germany when it comes to initiating fundamental changes. Thus, no agreement could be reached on the central issues of organizational adjustments - especially with regard to the establishment of a Council for National Security. The document concludes, "An Integrated Security Policy requires adjustments to our policies to meet new challenges." The strategy is silent on what these structural administrative adjustments or any measures might look like.

What is likely?

Foreign policy is defined in the classical understanding as a statement of the state's will with regard to developments that take place beyond its state borders, i.e., in the international community. Strategy should also not be confused with international relations theory.

Theorists tend to simplify and to have ideal-typical conceptions of reality. A strategy, however, must take into account the logic underlying the behavior of the actors. This means, in particular, to grasp the internal contradictions.

Every action is based on probabilities. In the current situation of the ongoing war, which was triggered by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and, like any war, carries the risk of escalation, it is more than useful to remember this. Strategy is the union of diplomacy and military strategy. Any strategy has the task of defining goals, and it must determine the means available to achieve those strategic goals.

It is one of the weaknesses of the NSS presented that the objectives are described in general terms, but a definition of the means is given only in a woolly way. The roles of the instruments - Bundeswehr, Foreign Service, Federal Intelligence Service - are not defined in the text.

The quality of a strategy is measured by Raymond Aron's question, "How can a change in the status quo be avoided without violating the law?" The difficulty of the current world system is its heterogeneity and the increasing influence of technological developments as strategic drivers. Describing reality in a strategic policy document requires understanding strategy in a way that names the geographic and military structural issues and captures the determinants of the relationship among the major actors. Again, there is relatively little in this regard in the present German government document.

Baerbock's naiveté

When Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock writes in the foreword: "For too long we in Germany have believed that our security in Europe is self-evident," and comes to the conclusion: "But our peace order is not set in stone," these sentences can also be interpreted as an admission of strategic naiveté.

In the current situation of strategic uncertainties and especially against the backdrop of the uncertain outcome of the Ukraine war, a fundamental problem is the restoration of peace. In addition, there is the question of how to prevent a change in the status quo from leading to an increase in threats. This is because the classic strategic goal - for example, of an equilibrium strategy in the Cold War - of maintaining the status quo is out of the question in the current situation.

The NSS finds no real answer to the three central strategic questions that arise after the crisis of the old order and in view of the increasing system rivalry: first, the question of how American power can be guaranteed in a post-American world against the background of the uncertainty of the internal development of the United States. And: what does this mean for the future development and shaping of the European-American relationship, in particular for the further development of the North Atlantic Alliance and its partnership policy or the security policy role of the European Union?

Secondly, the question arises as to how the strategic problem of Russia, which will be a European task especially in the coming years, can be solved. The text does not specify what strategic tasks this poses for German and European policy toward Russia - initially in the context of successful containment and then increasingly with a view to peaceful coexistence and resurgent cooperation.

The China question

Russia is the number one threat today. But after an end to the Ukraine war, it seems more likely that shaping the future relationship with China will be the dominant strategic issue of the next ten to twenty years. China is aptly described in the National Security Strategy as a "partner, competitor, and systemic rival" without explaining the strategic consequences for German security policy.

The dialectic of war and peace and the resulting consequences for security policy must therefore be at the heart of any strategy for national security. This must define, against the specific German background, the relationship between governance, the military as an instrument of politics, and society. The NSS does not do all this. It is more like a rehash of the coalition agreement. The part on nuclear is inherently contradictory.
Maintaining the international order

Particularly in view of the power shifts of the present, a national security strategy should have answered the question of under what conditions a future international order will be maintained and strengthened. This also corresponds to the strategic guideline for the goals of German foreign and security policy as defined in the preamble to the Basic Law: to serve a Europe at peace as an equal member.

Willy Brandt's word that foreign policy is peace policy has its origin here. Peace prevails when nations do not fight each other by military means. Peace is based on power. It is thus linked to the ability to use power to influence others who threaten peace.

Out of the organizational trap

By its very nature, war is a test of wills. The strategic question, on the other hand, must be how supranational society can unfold in the face of increasing heterogeneity in the system and how international law can be strengthened. Declarations of intent on the non-permanent seat on the Security Council and reform of the United Nations do not answer the strategic question about the future of the collective security system.

In a 1953 speech ("The Seven Pillars of Unwisdom"), American Democrat, political strategist, and later security advisor to Ronald Reagan Paul Nitze outlined possible pitfalls to watch out for when writing a national security strategy. First: the organization trap, or more specifically, the danger of overemphasizing international organizations and overestimating the United Nations as a world government. Second: the notion that speeches and declarations of intent alone can bring down the walls of Jericho. Third: the belief in the remedy of personnel exchange.

Fourth, goal attainment through neglect of allies (and thus overestimating one's own prescriptions). Fifth: achieving goals by withdrawing from international tasks and limiting them. (The vague passages on the Bundeswehr's financial resources and the reference to tight budgets could be interpreted in this way). Sixth, the notion that all problems can be solved through the use of personal diplomacy. And finally, Nitze cites as the seventh error the view that technology alone can enable the achievement of goals.

It would be advisable to review Germany's new National Security Strategy for such principles in its incompleteness and statements about the international system that have not been thought through to the end.
--------
Ulrich Schlie is Henry Kissinger Professor of Security and Strategic Studies and Director of the Center for Advanced Security, Strategic and Integration Studies (Cassis) at the University of Bonn.
https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/deutschla...ert-ld.1745495

NZZ runs regional limitations and is not displayed everywhere.


----------------


In another eassy on the German govenrment, the NZZ chosed a title that serves ver well to summarize the value of this German "Security Strategy" very well: arrogance does not solve problems.

As I mentioned repeatedly, German political thinklng and acting lacks the ability oft think in long terms, to think strategically instead of opportunistcially carry from just one legislature to the next, and in even short intervals. This paper they wrote illustrates how very true that deficitm is.

It also illustrates naivety and laymenship. The political craftsman's 101 of skill and techncial base abilities and understandings - is not mastered. Which is another common thread that runs through the entire political activity of this amateur play group called "government" the technical badness of its results, the lousy craftsmanship. Merkel had at least the decency not to deliberately disclose her dillentantism, she knew how to dress it in order to hide it: by pleasing the plebs no matter the longterm costs. The members of the Scholz cabinet lack that much shame. So does Scholz himself.

A series of small interview snippets with ordinary German people on what they want the Berliner politicans to know and why they have turned away from the established parties and towards the AfD.


The estalbished parties so far are in complete denial of these reasons, and defame them, or arrogantly oppose them with left-ideological reasons or untenable promises of how great things will be in the future. Blasé arrogance is the main characteristic nowadays. Complete disconnection from the normal citizen's everyday life reality. These politicians know nothing about the world anymore. And nothing about profound economics.


https://www-focus-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

The Germans have discovered their love of stabbing, or rather, they have imported it. The number of actual stabbings is obviously many times higher than announced by the official authorities and reported by the German propaganda media without any objections. The suspicion of deliberate concealment of unwelcome consequences of uncontrolled immigration, and of deliberate deception of the public, is absolutely obvious. The clear majority of knife crimes (over 60 every day) are committed by foreigners with or without German passports.


https://www-tichyseinblick-de.transl..._x_tr_pto=wapp


You possibly must hit "Ich unterstütze bereits".

The days of the Tiger combat helicopter are numbered.

https://www.nzz.ch/international/nac...&_x_tr_sl=auto

It was an inferior and now really bad solution from beginning on, because it was a political project from beginning on. The AH-64 Apache Longbow would have been the superior solution, so is the AH-1 Cobra. But politicians wanted to mess thigns up, and so they did.

I hope the article does not disappear behind a paywall, like so often at NZZ.

Using DeepL has become a pain due to its new now extremely small word count limit.

They now want to buy a civilian machine used by police and the ADAC. Nobody in the armed forces likes this idea, the engine is too weak, and you cannot pick such a civilian thing, hang some - few - weapons to its belly and then think you have a gunship helicopter capable to survive on the modern battlefield. Its being used by special forces, but if it should take those four commandos aboard, it must fly with only half of its fuel, due to weight constraints. Its a stupid idea. And thats is why not a few politicians poress for it.

I think they should go with loitering ammunitions instead. Cheap. Fast to produce in huge quantities. Maintenance does not compare to that needed for manned machines. The Ukraine war writes some new, and even unwanted truths. Loitering ammunitions is one of the biggest problem of the Ukrainian offensive, and soldiers say they currently fear nothing more than these.

Bureaucracy, taxes, shortage of skilled workers: One in four German SMEs is thinking of giving up

According to a survey, around one in four German SMEs is said to be considering closing down. For some entrepreneurs, a move abroad is also conceivable. There are many reasons for these considerations.

More than one in four medium-sized companies (26 percent) are considering giving up their business, according to a recent industry survey. This is the result of a survey by the Bundesverband mittelständische Wirtschaft (German Association of Small and Medium-Sized Businesses), which was made available to the Deutsche Presse-Agentur. More than one in five SMEs (22 percent) are even thinking about relocating abroad.

Above all, entrepreneurs feel inhibited by too much bureaucracy, with just under a third of respondents citing excessive regulations as a constraint. More than a quarter see high taxes and duties as an obstacle. Likewise, just over a quarter of respondents feel their business is restricted by the worsening shortage of skilled workers.

"The results of our survey are more than just a warning signal," said Markus Jerger, chairman of the association, according to a statement. If homebound, deep-rooted entrepreneurs are thinking about giving up or moving abroad, that "can't leave anyone cold."

Among the SMEs surveyed, there is a strong desire for reliability and predictability with regard to the general conditions. However, just under 40 percent gave a positive assessment of Germany's infrastructure in the survey, while 36 percent praised the country's political stability.


[Focus]


Two things worry me.
First, this rate is constantly climbing to the current level since several years, and it is clear that we have a net brain drain as well whcih accelerated over the past 2 years. Its not a snapshot caused by random chance, but it mounted up over several years.
Second, different to the tone of the article'S last paragraph I find it alarming when only 40% give a posiitive assessment of the infrastructure and only 36% praise the political stablity anymore. Only 40 and 36%...? Red lights blinking all across the panel.



If I were an entrepreneur with a great business idea, I would get out of Germany and Europe before thinking about building a company. No chance I would build a business in Germany, not even if they pay me money.

Another symptom for Germany's economic troubles: now the German startup scene is collapsing. Fasten your seatbelts, we go vertically.



https://www-welt-de.translate.goog/w..._x_tr_pto=wapp

The German economy has had a good innings over the years though and hopefully it will make a comeback.

2%? Forget it. You just dont understand German humour.



https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/der-ander...&_x_tr_sl=auto

Solar cell manufacturer Meyer Burger is shipping machines to the U.S. for eastern Germany because of the high subsidies. The lessons are obvious.

It's a blow to everyone who wants to make the domestic photovoltaic industry strong again: Swiss solar module manufacturer Meyer Burger has succumbed to the lure of lavish subsidies in the U.S. and is building a new solar cell plant in Colorado.

For this purpose, production machines that were intended for an expansion in Saxony-Anhalt are now being shipped across the ocean. In America, the capital invested generates a government subsidy return from the start of production. Washington is mercilessly stepping up the pace in its efforts to escape its dependence on Chinese suppliers of future technologies.

For an entrepreneur whose business is in troubled waters, that makes the decision clear. Even if Meyer Burger says the expansion in the East is only postponed, the lessons are obvious: In the competition for scarce production resources, it's not just about the amount of subsidies, but also about ease and speed of implementation. This further drives up the price of rapid independence.

[FAZ]

Germany becomes the new Easter Island. The Easter Islanders built stone statutes to call the gods. The Germans build windmills to call sustainability and get into climate heaven. Both people in the end will have fallen.

https://www-tichyseinblick-de.transl..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Click on "Ich unterstütze bereits". I hope Google Translator works.