GER politics thread

[Catfish]

No time to read this all now, will do this tomorrow.

Lobbies should be forbidden, disposed off, some individuals of those organisations deserve to be shot, or worse. We have quite a lot of those in Germany.

Just a thought. imho the EU is the only international organisation that gives at least one or two thoughts about animals and species-concerned transportation and 'humane' killing of animals, which is the reason why this individual Dan Jørgensen(?) tried to convince them. The EU.

The fact that the EU is being undercut by lobby organisations means that it has not the power to stop this. You and the right wing would say they are bribed, and so on, and yaddayadda. The system is obviously not perfect.
But is this the fault of the EU, or should it be set into a state and power of law, able to fight those lobbies?
If, if there would be even one proposal of this kind, to 'arm' the EU in a way to really be able to fight this, every nationalist organisation plus the international ones would virtually "explode", and try to destroy the EU.
Which is what is just now happening.

So i take it you demand a better system (and imho rightly so), where do we begin?
Destroy the EU? Improve it? Do you think there will be a better organisation if we destroy it, or will it be not a fallback into nationalist interests; and petitions as Dan Jorgenson tried would never even be tried at all?

[mapuc]

Ok I'm not exactly happy about EU, so I am by definition a right wing.

Interesting.

Markus

[Catfish]

No, I'd say a nationalist will be probably against the EU, but if you are against the EU you are not necessarily a nationalist or right-wing.

But I would say that a nationalist is by definition more right-wing than left-wing?
And nationalists are usually for their country alone, and against international above-state oganisations that might meddle or interfere with their nation's 'isolated' laws. Like denying standard basic pay for workers, scientific exchange, and at least looking at other opinions.
Example being Hungary, or Poland who gladly take the money from the EU, but do not necessarily accept democratic or ethical concepts.
I guess it is hard to blare against the EU 24/7 but conceal advantages, bit it worked with brexit and we and they will see where the advantages are, or not.
You could argue that the EU is only a trading organisation, but after the old EG which indeed was only about trade, it is now much more.

[Skybird]

When political systems and institutions fail and players are corrupt and lobbyists dance on the tables, to widen their reach and increase their influence and blow up political systems' proportions will cure that and protect against even greater damages.

Logical.

[Catfish]

So what do you propose? I am all against lobbies, but tell this to the automotive industry, big pharma and all that.
I wonder if companies suddenly have the insight to stop their bribing, if the EU vanishes.

[Skybird]

https://www.ardmediathek.de/video/te...gvbzExNTMwNTk/


Plenty of typos, I know I know...
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...d.php?t=159065

Brilliant book, intelligent man. So much to learn from it to answer your question, Catfish. Not that I haven't answered this your same question many times before.


"Small is beautiful".

[Catfish]

The video is interesting, though i see no connection here.
There is much better connection and comparison to the past, the fate of the Minoans and the backfall from the bronze to the stone age, because vital supporters of other civilisations and TRADE ran into problems. They had made themselves dependent in a way that a sudden cut of resources finally led to terrible conditions. If there is a connection to the EU in the video (which i outright refuse), then it could be that the EU does not work close enough to backup member nations running into problems. Because of still too much jingoism, and egotism.
Yes, if in ancient times a great cvilisation "died" or lost its leading role, you could say it only concerned them, so a separation into nations is better than a bigger one, since only this smaller one will "die". But the video with Jared Diamond exactly describes how wrong this view is. Single isolated "nations" or tribes without conection to other partners will die out when they run into too much problems.

Regarding your own quote i may recite:

"1. All human behaviour is egoistical in that even any rational decision-making and weighing of options depends on standards seen as valid by the individual – even where assessing if own standards shall bow to standards (or demands) of others.

2. Rational behaviour tends to be destructive in the long run, since it is based on egoistical mo-tives in the meaning of point 1.), and beyond, it favours the strong at the cost of the weaker. An economy basing on egoism as it’s prime motivation aims at preventing competition, dis-connects itself from it’s service for the community, and ultimately destroys both the com-munity and itself – doing so rationally, and as a result of rational, reasonable decision-making.

3. Rationality therefore needs complementation by altruism to evade destructive effects caused by itself, and ultimately to evade rational suicide. The weighing of altruism versus egoism again includes an egoistic element (see 1.) ), as long as altruism is no represented in a “truly self-less love” for the interest of the other, which “agape” in the understanding of Christian tradition comes the closest to. We want to differ between general altruism and agape, there-fore."

If there ever was a pro-argument for the EU by you, it is here

I agree that "we are too many". This "monoculture" supports the spreading of viruses, as the destruction of this planet's ecosystems, fueling wars for resources and so on. Most western nations have no problem with overpopulation, because as a materially and food-wise saturated community or civilisation you do not need to rely on big families to support each other, but e.g. China follows a completey different path. Do you want to solve this problem of over-population by wars, or by education, and support of a certain level of material wellbeing for fewer people(s)?

[Skybird]

We will always disagree on whether more political commanding leads to more solution (you) or more political commanding is part of the problem and will prevent solutions (me).



The link between the topic and the video is that the author there is talking about his book "Collapse", and all what I said in that old thread is a summary of that book's conclusion on what politics (=administrative responsible acting) must be about. The EU is the exact opposite to that, and accumulates powers for the purpose of being more powerful. In that it is not one bit different than any other tyranny out there - and disconnects itself from the people more and more. Diamond points out the importance that political systems are not bigger than the members/citizens of them can overlook them and can see what consequences anybody's actions (including one's own) has on all others' (including oneself), and that rule makers must not be allowed to free themselves from the consequences of their rules, he also illustrates the dramatic relevance of the tragedy of the commons (Tragik der Allmende) and in generla is showing why always bigger political systems and social/communal systems and administration seals their fate to fall and go extinct, last but not least by becomign the more ineffcieint the bigger they become and the more disconnected from reality they become by right that. The whole book is about that: how very reasonable reasons like the ones you give in defence of the EU time and again lead to exactly the opposite of what is hoped to achieve by "following reason". The EU , potlicians in general, all the time argue with "rteason". 'On can debate whether it is that, but that term and label is what everybody claims for himself: I want to do the reasonable thing. In the book Diamond gives over a dozen examples for cultures that fell due to thinking they had good reasons for doing what they were doing. Some relgious reaosns. Soime reaosns based on insufficient kknowledge that was htoguzt to be complete. Mostly reasons based on assumed "reason". He aolso gives exmapels for how totalitarian regimes like the Shogunat in Japan prevented the worst right due to its centraliozation of control, th Shoguns were the reaosnw hy Japan today is such a green country with so many forests - without the shoguns, it would look like Spain today, or Greece: dry, desolate, desert-like.



I red three books by him. Collapse was the one that impressed me the most. The Pulitzer he won for another one, however (Guns, Germs and Steel).

[Catfish]

This is not what he says in the video.. your text seems more like drawing the wrong conclusions from the same arguments.

I will not be here forever but i guess i will have a look on his book "Collapse", i don't think it will change my view. If you do not learn how to work together internationally and fast, no one will be left to argue. You are missing the chance.

[Skybird]

I did not conclude, but summarized the book. His reasonings there became part of my arguments on and against certain things. Including the accumulation of ever more powers in tbd hands of politicians thinking that that is reasonable, like the EU. Diamonds book is about how cultures fell for reasonable motives, and how sometimes non-freedom was the precondition for avoiding the fall. The democratic zeitgeist hates to see that. I sometimes touched upon that too, when reminding of that ancient greek democracy was nlt a modern democratic free order of state, but pure feudalism.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

[...] how cultures fell for reasonable motives, and how sometimes non-freedom was the precondition for avoiding the fall. The democratic zeitgeist hates to see that. [...]

With China and brexit being your favourites the recent not-so-democratic Zeitgeist will soon put an end to better living conditions and democracy, the leftist ecology movement will be crushed, temperatures will go down again just by not talking about it, and then they all lived happily ever after

[Catfish]

"Man charged in Germany with spying for China"
https://www.reuters.com/world/man-ch...na-2021-07-06/
So there is still something left that Huawei phones have not transmitted yet

[Skybird]

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:


Now Germany's model construction site finally is getting cracks. When Tesla announced an electric car factory in Grünheide, Brandenburg, in November 2019, the state government was full of ambition. After the BER breakdown airport, Tesla should become an example that Germany can do differently. Modern, fast, unbureaucratic. It was like that at the beginning. With the help of provisional individual permits, Tesla pulled up the first halls at lightning speed.

But meanwhile it has stalled. The State Environment Agency is still examining hundreds of objections from environmentalists. Economics Minister Jörg Steinbach (SPD), once Schering manager and President of the TU Berlin, is doing everything possible not to show his impatience. The fact that Tesla is meanwhile building tanks that have not yet been approved doesn't make things any easier. American hands-on mentality collides with German thoroughness.

Because the approval procedure for the battery factory, which is also planned, is now starting all over again, the most recently announced start of production at the end of 2021 should be more of a hope than a realistic forecast. With today's knowledge, would Tesla set up its factory again in Germany? Doubts are in order.

[Skybird]

Tax payer memorial day in Germany.

Until today, the statistically average, normal employee/worker has worked only for paying fees and taxes to the state and social system. None of his earned loans he was allowed to keep until here.



In the remaining time of the year he will work for getting paid himself and keep his loans.
Germany his a maximum taxation country. In practically no other country in the world, citizens need to hand over as much money for taxes and mandatory social fees, like in Germany. Belgium is en par. Statistically average private wealth/savings/property, is higher than in Germany. Its also higher in Spain and Greece and Austria. Two of these get plenty of money transfers via the EU and ECB, last but not least from Gemany.


Arrogant politicians even claim that German people like to have it this way and love to pay. There are indeed were a couple of names from the big parties who on various occasions indeed claimed this, believe it or not, amongst them the current German finance ministre (SPD). Bastards.

Raping a victim, and afterwards generously asking "Was it good for you, baby?"

[Skybird]

Schwer was los in Germany.

















https://www.dw.com/en/at-least-20-de...tes/a-58270820

https://www.dw.com/en/mass-destructi...any/g-58272774

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57846200

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/5...loods-n1274014

https://abcnews.go.com/International...c_strip_sq_hed