Germany Thread: KEIN FASCHISMUS LEUDE BIDDE

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Germany Thread: KEIN FASCHISMUS LEUDE BIDDE

«‹›2043 »

hankor: May 7, 2009; The feast is not the most important meal of the day.
Breakfast is!

az posted:

Calling this wrong unless you provide evidence of some sort of planned reformation into the Linke. As far as the public is aware, the Linke is a collection of socialist politicians that hail mostly from the SPD, Greens and, to some degree, former SEDs.
Reading the rest of your post, you seem to have a massive bone to pick with the Linke. I have some ideas as to where you got your ideas from but I'd like to hear from you.

Are you serious? While I don't like polemic bashing of "die Linke" (there is enough factual stuff you can use) denying it's history is pretty bad. Have you honestly never heard of the PDS?

The SED was rebranded into Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands � Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (SED-PDS) in 1989 the following year they rebranded it to Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS), in 2005 they rebranded again to Die Linkspartei.PDS. Then in 2007 they joined together with the WASG to form die Linke. The year before they became die Linke the PDS had six times the members the WASG had.

So no, neither in the public opinion nor factually is die Linke formed mostly by former member of the SPD and Greens, the overwhelming majority hails from a party that is directly related to the SED.

Edit: I forgot you wanted evidence, how about the current draft for the party program of die Linke?

http://www.die-linke.de/fileadmin/download/programmdebatte/100426_draft_programme_en.pdf

hankor fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Oct 6, 2011

# ? Oct 6, 2011 20:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 11, 2024 21:52

Spice World War II: Jul 12, 2004

The SED had 2,3 million members. Of these 2,3 million members 5% transferred over to the Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS).

The merger with the WASG happened in 2007 and merged 60000 PDS members with 11500 WASG members. At that time, 24% of the overall membership was from west Germany already (and therefore not SED). Their ex-SED membership is rapidly dieing out, 68% of their membership in the eastern parts of Germany are 60 years and older.

(These numbers are from a report of the Bundeszentrale f�r politische Bildung)

They still have enough people with reprehensible ideas (like the loons that keep popping up that defend the wall and the border policies of the DDR). But they clearly are not in a position to do anything but cause minor scandals by giving dumb statements, even in their own party. So sending the Verfassungsschutz after them seems like a hilarious overreaction.

# ? Oct 6, 2011 21:51

hankor: May 7, 2009; The feast is not the most important meal of the day.
Breakfast is!

dreamin' posted:

The SED had 2,3 million members. Of these 2,3 million members 5% transferred over to the Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS).

You'd have a point if those 95% wouldn't have been pressured into joining the party, as it stands the people that remained in the party are more than likely to identify with the SED.

dreamin' posted:

The merger with the WASG happened in 2007 and merged 60000 PDS members with 11500 WASG members. At that time, 24% of the overall membership was from west Germany already (and therefore not SED).

That's still a major part of the resulting party originating from the PDS. As for the 24% of PDS members from western germany, people move, usually to a place that offers better living conditions i.e. western Germany. It doesn't even matter if the members from west Germany are former SED or not, they still joined a party that has major ties to the SED which would imply that they share the ideas.

dreamin' posted:

Their ex-SED membership is rapidly dieing out, 68% of their membership in the eastern parts of Germany are 60 years and older.

So the majority of the party is likely to originate from the SED, got that.

dreamin' posted:

They still have enough people with reprehensible ideas (like the loons that keep popping up that defend the wall and the border policies of the DDR). But they clearly are not in a position to do anything but cause minor scandals by giving dumb statements, even in their own party. So sending the Verfassungsschutz after them seems like a hilarious overreaction.

The Verfassungsschutz isn't after them because some of them have rose-tinted glasses when they think about the GDR. They are watched because some of the members use the party to directly support extremist groups like the PKK and the KPF.

I'm not saying that the Linke at large is trying to turn the country into GDR 2 but the SED leads directly into die Linke you can't deny that, it's not the same party but they have important roots there. This and the views, statements and actions of some of it's more powerful members attract some people that are a danger to society, they use the party's infrastructure to fund and organize themselves in a way that apparently warrants an investigation by the Verfassungsschutz.

I actually don't even mind former SED-members in politics, I might not share their views but usually they have a real ideology they understand and demand things that are at least partly rooted in reality (see Gysi). They don't actively try to destroy this state but try to nudge it in a direction that they deem positive.

hankor fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 6, 2011 22:33

Deceitful Penguin: Feb 16, 2011

flavor posted:

I'm not German, so no point to lump me in with that. Maybe to you I'm German by association.

Ok, sorry about that. Force of habit I guess.

flavor posted:

I meant in serious, meaningful and public discourse. You could also bring up how the moon landing was staged here, but that doesn't make it a serious issue. I'd need to see at least some credible accusations from potential victims, not some post from some guy pondering the possibility.

Ok. I concede the point that I lack strong data to support my case. My experience, again, arises mostly from Japan rather than Germany, which is what started this whole tangent, for me at least.

flavor posted:

I'd be seriously interested in all the places where police can get tickets from the police.

Here. Scandinavia. Speed cameras don't discriminate after all. Coppers rarely meet each other here and always when they do drive around they tend to slow down traffic with their annoying antic of actually driving under the speed limit.

flavor posted:

If they don't have that green color anymore, great. That looked awful.

You sir, obviously lack taste. That soothing green colour is what made watching Kommisar Rex a joy.

flavor posted:

No, we were discussing the subject in general and I haven't read the reports.

Ah? Right, you said, general discussion.

az posted:

It's dishonest when you seemingly single out Germany

In the Germany discussion thread? Am I reading you right? That I am singling Germany out in the Germany Discussion thread?

az posted:

and declare racism endemic, when compared to its neighbours or other large nations it's actually neither the worst, most or in fact, endemic.

Ok, I'll withdraw my comment about it "Endemic" and instead say that it seemed somewhat widespread. This, in fact, does nothing to change the fact that it exists. But if the word so irritates you, I'll withdraw it.

az posted:

There's this idea floating about that Germany still somehow compares to the third Reich, or is the beacon of white supremacy of modern times, both of which are absurd.

Really? This is news to me. I have always seen it as a nation sincerely trying to move away from that but still plagued with small groups of utter idiots. Although from my reading of Wallraff the image isn't exactly very pretty, either.

az posted:

Speaking of Scandinavia, the countries in question have had a considerably smaller number of immigration and smaller percentage of foreign rooted population. However you will find that there is a considerable amount of racism and white supremacy beneath the surface. The reaction a black man would receive in Hamburg is considerably different than say Oslo. Excactly because there are fewer "foreigners" and the native population isn't as used to them as for example Germans are.

Oh, hell yes. Racism is a very real problem and one that I, in what little way I can, struggle against every day. Derogatory usage of language is the least of it. My nan was a full blown loving racist. It made me livid sometimes listening to her. She didn't think of black people as people. She even insulted my cousins boyfriend at the dinner table.
That said, I certainly never saw the same level of economic disparity I did in Germany in Scandinavia or here. I never heard of immigrant kids being told to enter lesser quality schools, or see them so under-represented.

az posted:

People like Breivik are just the newest and scariest byproduct of culture struggle in Scandinavia, and it may just get worse before it gets better.

Oh gods yes. I am very afraid sometimes that we were too late in stamping down the extreme right wing. Now we have to reap the harvest of our inattention.
I just hope that nothing so terrible as Brevik will happen again.

az posted:

True on a matter of fact basis, but I personally despise the idea of carte-blanching either side in a problematic situation. I've heard people say to my face that "it's just what they do".

That is denying them agency, which I have also seen from both sides. Those people are murderers, as simple as that, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

az posted:

Ignoring that in the cultural struggle in Germany, both sides, or actually all sides (the state, policy, politics, politicians, german nationals, foreigners, immigrants, etc) play ball and have their faults is bad for discourse and will lead to nothing but finger pointing.

Yes. Through reasoned discussion on all sides things can be solved. But I've too often seen the bigoted side be unwilling to sit down and discuss things, rather than the other way around.
(Which makes it problematic when there are right-wing bigots on both sides)

And poo poo, the reason I write this is because I care about Germany. I love it, even though I dislike many parts of it. I wouldn't complain otherwise.

# ? Oct 6, 2011 23:42

az: Dec 2, 2005

hankor posted:

Are you serious? While I don't like polemic bashing of "die Linke" (there is enough factual stuff you can use) denying it's history is pretty bad. Have you honestly never heard of the PDS?

Of course I know the PDS, I just blanked on it writing the post. And I'm aware of the connection between the SED, and by proxy of the PDS the Linke. His assertment that the Linke was literally a plant of the SED is what I was questioning.

Deceitful Penguin posted:

In the Germany discussion thread? Am I reading you right? That I am singling Germany out in the Germany Discussion thread?

Heh, true enough. I was meaning the rather widely held notion that Germany is very and openly racist, more so than others, which I'm tired and resentful of.

Deceitful Penguin posted:

Ok, I'll withdraw my comment about it "Endemic" and instead say that it seemed somewhat widespread. This, in fact, does nothing to change the fact that it exists. But if the word so irritates you, I'll withdraw it.

As above, it's not the word, it's the notion. The notion that Germany is supposedly racist-ier than other places, which was my understanding going into this debate.

In the end, intellectual honesty and integrity is important to me, especially in matters of great importance. Even minor mistakes in arguing or fact checking can smear and sour the entire debate.

Deceitful Penguin posted:

And poo poo, the reason I write this is because I care about Germany. I love it, even though I dislike many parts of it. I wouldn't complain otherwise.

Yeah, being conscious of the state of affairs in the world is very important, I live in this country and have to watch stupid poo poo happen every day. Doesn't mean one should stop trying to make things better.

quote:

That said, I certainly never saw the same level of economic disparity I did in Germany in Scandinavia or here. I never heard of immigrant kids being told to enter lesser quality schools, or see them so under-represented.

I had a long writeup here detailing inconsistencies in the media reports and public discourse over these issues but it was too much to cover properly right now as I have to run, I may get back to it later.

What I wanted to leave was the recent North Carolina policy push to literally re-segregate school district. Something much worse than what I've seen over here. Random link I grabbed off of google: clicky

az fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 00:30

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

Jesus guys, could you please stop with the quoting wars. The multiple quotes in your posts, each followed by one sentence rebuttals, make it really annoying to read.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 07:40

hankor: May 7, 2009; The feast is not the most important meal of the day.
Breakfast is!

DeusEx posted:

Jesus guys, could you please stop with the quoting wars. The multiple quotes in your posts, each followed by one sentence rebuttals, make it really annoying to read.

Sure.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 07:55

Einbauschrank: Nov 5, 2009

DeusEx posted:

Well, then I'm a despicable fool. Better have me watched over by the Verfassungschutz. Oh, and also all the people in former East Germany, who should have suffered the most from the SED regime, and still vote for the Linke in large numbers must be despicable idiots.

We're living in a democracy, everybody - fools and extremists included - is allowed to vote. I consider the voters of extremists parties to be extremists or idiots and I don't think this is debatable. By the way, I didn't call the fools despicable, but the etremists. And I guess that as a fat bourgeois I would fare much worse under your system than you are suffering at the moment.

quote:

But mostly I like that you accuse of people aiming for socialism, as if this would be something evil and nefarious.

Reading a history book or two might enlighten you on how this notion came into existence.

quote:

It may come as a surprise for you, there are a lot of people out there, that think that our current capitalistic system where we funnel more and more public money into the financial institutions, while financing this with austerity measures for the broader public, is morally despicable.

Oh, the rage! Spending money not the way you want it to be spent is of course a crime that makes shooting people in the back who try to leave the shithole called socialism appear like a minor inconvenience that has to be accepted for the greater good.

And as this thread used to be about education: The percentage of students at university who had a working class background was higher in ther FRG than in the socialist dreamland GDR. (Sozialstruktur Deutschlands, 4. Auflage, S. 289).

quote:

Why don't we talk about CDU heroes like Filbinger, who served death sentences as a Nazi judge on the navy martial court and was prime minister of Baden-W�rttemberg, or Globke, who was director of Adenauers chancellery, and a commentator of the Nuremburg Race Laws under the Third Reich.

Ah yes, the fresh and exciting news from 1963 and 1978. About as up to date as Socialism. Either way, I don't see your point. Because Filbinger had to step down after being accused of being a national-socialist rear end in a top hat we have to tolerate socialist assholes?

Discussions with supporters of the extreme left more or less always go along the same lines: You tell them what they don't like to hear about the utter moral and economical failure of socialism in the last 90 years, they helplessly try to counter with "But...but... Clinton ... and Filbinger" and then think that because there were Nazis in the 70ies (even in the GDR, by the way) it is perfectly fine to support a party that was responsible for 40 years of dictatorship on German soil.

az posted:

Calling this wrong unless you provide evidence of some sort of planned reformation into the Linke. As far as the public is aware, the Linke is a collection of socialist politicians that hail mostly from the SPD, Greens and, to some degree, former SEDs.

What do you call wrong? That there is direct line of continuity to the SED? It was only in 2009 that the Linke declared: �,Die Linke� ist rechtsidentisch mit der ,Linkspartei.PDS�, die es seit 2005 gab, und der PDS, die es vorher gab, und der SED, die es vorher gab.� That's not what you would call a clear cut with the ties to the past. There was no need to cling to a smeared name (and a smeared ideology, but that is another problem).

quote:

Reading the rest of your post, you seem to have a massive bone to pick with the Linke. I have some ideas as to where you got your ideas from but I'd like to hear from you.

I hate how people have been able to weasel out of their responsibility in Germany and how they rewrite their own biography. I was not born in the 60ies and 70ies but I can definitely call out on bullshit that happens in the 90ies and 21st century. I am connected to the project "Tapping Hitler's Generals" and "Soldaten" (Neitzel/Welzer) because I am interested in mentalities and political systems. Myself, I would describe as being in the foot steps of Eugen Richter and the Freisinn that itself follows the Scottish Enlightment.

It is rather annyoing to me to see how people have always been trying to downplay their support of an inhumane ideology. After the war it was all of Hitler's fault etc. etc. (during the war it was "If only the Fuhrer knew"). After the reunification it was "Socialism is a good idea that was simply badly implemented " or "We didn't have bananas but at least we had solidarity". The cognitive dissonance is nauseating and reading this thread shows me that very old (and very oafish) memes are still at work, even 20 years after unification.

StrangeRobot posted:

You're a complete nutter if you seriously think the GDR and the loving third Reich are anywhere on the same scale of evil.

Phew, then I am lucky that I didn't do so and that one would have to be reading impaired to think so. And speaking of nutters: People who write "The Federal Republic has no constitution" are about as reputable as Truthers and Birthers.

Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 10:20 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 08:36

Duzzy Funlop: Jan 13, 2010; Hi there, would you like to try some spicy products?

DeusEx posted:

Jesus guys, could you please stop with the quoting wars. The multiple quotes in your posts, each followed by one sentence rebuttals, make it really annoying to read.

This thread jumps back and forth between or moves on to different/related issues at a breakneck pace, with roughly 4 issues on this page alone (heck, I'm surprised we dodged the nuclear power bullet earlier) and you want posts to be less specific as to their references?

Let a brother multiquote, jesus christ.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 08:49

champagne posting: Apr 5, 2006; YOU ARE A BRAIN
IN A BUNKER

Just write a reply in one text like a real reply instead of the american style panel rebuttal.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 09:37

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

hankor posted:

What may seem like a joke ruling is actually very important. It basically means that the german constitution is not applicable to european law that is applicable in germany as long as the european courts have a standard that is similar enough to our constitution.

This ruling is so important because it makes clear that we are ready to make some concessions in order to further the european idea but that our allegiance is to our constitution and that we will never sacrifice it's core values.

You definitely argue like a law student, are you a law student by chance? You seem to only think within the constraints of the law in the books, excluding systematic political corruption and unfairness and accepting obviosly bullshit court decisions just because they are "legal" now. You're not in class here, you don't have to give the "right"(in the sense of the book and the professor) answer, you won't get graded here.

Either way, judging by the way the Verfassungsgericht(I'll call it that way so non-Germans don't have to decipher "BVerfG", so no need to correct me there like you did) has acted in the past the talk of "core values" is laughable. When nothing is safe from change, and it isn't, then there are no "core values". Going the way of the lawyer I'm sure you could reinterpret the Grundgesetz to legitimise a brutal repressive police-state.

If there's enough political will or unchecked force, nothing is safe, and that's what I'm trying to explain to you. Being all like "No worries there, a fascist police state serving the mega-rich is ILLEGAL, we're safe, guys!" is in fact just being a gullible sucker.

There arises of course the problem how to decide if laws we don't like are unconvenient but neccesary and fair or corrupt bullshit squeezed in by lobbyists in backroom deals. Still my point is that you shouldn't be all "It's legal so it's just!".

I would respect the Verfassungsgericht much more if their decisions just weren't so convenient for the powers that be. I mean it's not like they sat around one day and one of them asked: "You know what? Is it really illegal to participate in an agressive bombing campaign against Serbia? I know, I know, sending troops beyond German borders is the most reprehensible thing we know right now, having tried to exterminate several ethinicities during the most horrible war yet known to man the last time we did a "preemptive attack" and all that. But still, is it REALLY illegal to do that? Let's discuss this completely abstract case!"

No it was more like the Government saying: "gently caress that no troops beyond German borders clause, the Americans want us to bomb Serbia, start the goddamn engines! You there, yes you wearing that ridiculous red dress like some kind of politically independent judge, reinterpret the Grundgesetz to our liking, quick!"

hankor posted:

Let's have a nice analogy,

No let's rather not. We're all grownups here, apparently Abitur-carrying down to the last realschule-jumping-upwards man/woman, able to understand even complex matters. No need to get caught up in shaky analogies.

Einbauschrank posted:

Phew, then I am lucky that I didn't do so and that one would have to be reading impaired to think so. And speaking of nutters: People who write "The Federal Republic has no constitution" are about as reputable as Truthers and Birthers.

Well, lets see your own words again(emphasis mine):

Einbauschrank posted:

Many NSDAP members even worked for the GDR and exchanged one dictatorship for the next.

Also:

Einbauschrank posted:

The "Linke" would be comparable to a non-forbidden NSDAP that simply renamed itself into "Superdemocratic Freedomloving Party"

So?

Also for a guy who claims to care about bad people getting of the hook in Germany you just handwave the Nazis away? The worst case of what you claim to be against just doesn't count because it's too long ago? Are you kidding me? You're all "never forget!" about a bunch of one-party police state with badly managed command economy types but the mass murdering rapists who tried to exterminate several ethnicities, murdered a fuckload of Germans(in death camps or by sending them to fight their war of conquest and extermination) and literally uncountable amounts of foreigners and left Germany standing as a pile of burned rubble before giving the command to basically commit national suicide are just "too long ago"? gently caress that!

Einbauschrank posted:

The fact that they gobbled up the WASG loonies doesn't change that fact,that there is still an unbroken line of continuity between the criminal SED that ruled the socialist dictatorship GDR and the party "die Linke".

There's also an unbroken line of continuity between the Third Reich and the FRG, so? Or depending on who you ask the FRG even IS the Third Reich. Also it's the GDR. Or the direct continuation of the GDR. It gets confusing now.

hankor posted:

I'm not saying that the Linke at large is trying to turn the country into GDR 2 but the SED leads directly into die Linke you can't deny that, it's not the same party but they have important roots there. This and the views, statements and actions of some of it's more powerful members attract some people that are a danger to society, they use the party's infrastructure to fund and organize themselves in a way that apparently warrants an investigation by the Verfassungsschutz.

Sure, there are some extremists there. (we could also get into a debate if the extremists aren't maybe right and the government that watches them is wrong, but that would make this thead completely unreadable) But now this question arises: "Is it sane to dedicate resources or even attention to impotently watch a tiny amount of likewise impotent crazies while the country is being destroyed by the people who tell us to watch out for the tiny group of crazies?"

On the matter of the Grundgesetz not being a real Verfassung now. I never claimed that. It is the de-facto and now also the de-jure Verfassung and nothing will change that. Still, how it was turned into a Verfassung was bullshit and there's no denying that.

StrangeRobot fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 20:02

elwood: Mar 28, 2001; by Smythe

StrangeRobot posted:

When nothing is safe from change, and it isn't, then there are no "core values".

Actually it is, except if we are talking revolution. You might want to google Ewigkeitsklausel.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 20:20

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

elwood posted:

Actually it is, except if we are talking revolution. You might want to google Ewigkeitsklausel.

I just wrote a retarded semi-funny piece about how an usurping group could easily reinterpret all those funny articles into their exact opposite without changing so much a a single word. I'll spare you that and rather say that the fact that some article cannot be abolished doesn't mean that they cannot be interpreted in a completely different way. Whats a "sozialer Bundesstaat" (social and federal state) for example? A federation made of facebook addicts? That joke is bad but still.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 20:45

elwood: Mar 28, 2001; by Smythe

Maybe it's because I'm part of it, but it seems I have a wee bit more faith in our justice system.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 20:54

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

elwood posted:

Maybe it's because I'm part of it, but it seems I have a wee bit more faith in our justice system.

If you're part of the justice system you're not really part of the economical system, being a handsomely paid official with luxurious pensions waiting to comfort you when you're old and all that.

Filthy commoners like myself on the other hand will be whipped and driven into the coal mines while the likes of you confiscate our homes and women for your corporate overlords. :whip:

# ? Oct 7, 2011 21:10

Mr. Smile Face Hat: Sep 15, 2003; Praise be to China's Covid-Zero Policy

StrangeRobot posted:

I just wrote a retarded semi-funny piece about how an usurping group could easily reinterpret all those funny articles into their exact opposite without changing so much a a single word. I'll spare you that and rather say that the fact that some article cannot be abolished doesn't mean that they cannot be interpreted in a completely different way. Whats a "sozialer Bundesstaat" (social and federal state) for example? A federation made of facebook addicts? That joke is bad but still.

According to you then, having a constitution is pointless. Why, any communication is pointless, too, because in the end those words could just mean whatever. Profound man, makes you think! :350:

I'll give you that a constitution always needs to be interpreted from a context, but that context isn't exactly hard to find in case of the Grundgesetz. Two of its most obvious design goals were to set a counterpoint to the Nazi regime and the Weimarer Verfassung and be way more clear about human rights and specific about democratic principles that can't be changed.

Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 21:40

hankor: May 7, 2009; The feast is not the most important meal of the day.
Breakfast is!

StrangeRobot posted:

trolling

Somehow the Verfassungsgericht sacks laws on a regular basis and bows to political pressure at the same time in your world. It couldn't possibly be that the judges actually know what they are doing and give detailed explanations for their reasoning.

There is systemic political corruption?
Germany ranks number 14 out of 180 countries when it comes to transparency. If you want to talk about lobbyism in Germany that's fine, it's an interesting and important topic but stop with your ridiculous hyperboles.
http://www.transparency.org/publications/gcr/gcr_2009#6.4

Back up your ridiculous claims with some facts or get your polemic rear end out of here.

Since you don't like analogies have a fable:

There once was a little chicken, it hatched from an egg on a farm.
Next to the farm was another farm, it produced corn on a field.
The chicken's farm and the corn farm helped each other out, they traded eggs and corn with a wheelbarrow.
When the chicken saw that it feared for it's potential siblings, of course it still ate the corn that was served in a tray
During the night it always bellowed out it's worries that the farmer was killing it's siblings, it cried loud and unclear on the grass.
One faithful day the chicken saw the wheelbarrow coming it's way, shocked of the fact it fell over dead on the ground.

A week later a veterinarian came and had a look at the farmer's chickens to ensure that everything was compliant with national and EU-law and that the chickens were well cared for, in that moment the farmer rushed to his computer and made a stupid post on the internet.

hankor fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 21:42

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

Einbauschrank posted:

Oh, the rage! Spending money not the way you want it to be spent is of course a crime that makes shooting people in the back who try to leave the shithole called socialism appear like a minor inconvenience that has to be accepted for the greater good.

Ah I see it's only money. And if one is opposed to the robbing of the general populace by the financial powers, then he must be surely some blood thirsty commie, that wants to establish gulags and a new wall.

I get it, it's only money, so we better shut up and fork it over, because opposition to to the current system means we're extremist idiots.

I could start arguing what "fine" regimes were installed all over the world in the name of fighting against socialism, like Spain under Franco, Portugal, Greece, Argentina, Pinochets Chile, gently caress basically the whole of Latin America. Perhaps you should also ask those people if they were happy dieing or "disappearing" for the greater good of "freedom and democracy".

But I guess your self-righteous bigotry is only consistent with someone who unirionically claims "Freisinn" and "Scottish-Enlightenment" as his political foundations nowadays.. That's even more spergy than those leftist that still call themselves "Marxist-Leninists" with solemn seriousness.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 21:43

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

flavor posted:

According to you then, having a constitution is pointless. Why, any communication is pointless, too, because in the end those words could just mean whatever. Profound man, makes you think!

That lenghty exchange about constitutions was actually in response to hankor basically saying that all is fine and well with the EU because the German Grundgesetz will protect us from all harm. Like it's some magic spell that'll drive off all evil.

Also it certainly seems pointless to worship a piece of paper if the interpretation of the laws becomes unjust. But that's really going off into :350:

territory here.

hankor posted:

Somehow the Verfassungsgericht sacks laws on a regular basis and bows to political pressure at the same time in your world.

It sacks laws often enough long after the illegal damage is done. Also it sacks mostly laws when that sacking doesn't really threaten the system in general or a course that's been internationally decided upon(I mean NATO-actions not some conspiracy).

By the way, what do you think of the EnBW acquisition case having been decided now in B-W? (it's not the BVerfG, but still an interesting case of a violation of a state constitution, by CDU people, with no real consequences for them or their friends on the horizon, like we talked about earlier)

hankor posted:

There is systemic political corruption?
Germany ranks number 14 out of 180 countries when it comes to transparency. If you want to talk about lobbyism in Germany that's fine, it's an interesting and important topic but stop with your ridiculous hyperboles.
http://www.transparency.org/publica...cr/gcr_2009#6.4

Back up your ridiculous claims with some facts or get your polemic rear end out of here.

Wait what, lobbyism isn't systemic political corruption now? Also Germany isn't a signatory of UNCAC. What about that?

And to construct a legally valid case of political corruption in German law as of right now is supposedly virtually impossible(I'm unsure here, but you're the law man so maybe you can clear that claim up). Your commentary here?

Apart from that. We have the erosion of workers' rights, wage stagnation and rampant unemployment while capital gains income is higher than ever, coincidence? We also do that "war" thing again.

EDIT: spelling and some clarification

StrangeRobot fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 21:53

Mr. Smile Face Hat: Sep 15, 2003; Praise be to China's Covid-Zero Policy

StrangeRobot posted:

That lenghty exchange about constitutions was actually in response to hankor basically saying that all is fine and well with the EU because the German Grundgesetz will protect us from all harm. Like it's some magic spell that'll drive off all evil.

Also it certainly seems pointless to worship a piece of paper if the interpretation of the laws becomes unjust. But that's really going off into territory here.

You don't get to weasel away from something you posted as an observation and in a public forum by saying that it was only in reply to somebody else.

Plus any distancing is insincere anyway considering how in your second paragraph you reaffirm that constitutions are pointless to you.

# ? Oct 7, 2011 22:33

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

flavor posted:

You don't get to weasel away from something you posted as an observation and in a public forum by saying that it was only in reply to somebody else.

Plus any distancing is insincere anyway considering how in your second paragraph you reaffirm that constitutions are pointless to you.

What do you want to hear then? Yes, a constitution in the sense most people understand it is pointless because like all laws it can be changed, if possible legally within the framework if impossible by heavy misinterpretation or if all fails by force. I'm not against the idea of having laws, I just think declaring laws to be eternally and specially valid and to claim they exist in a separate category is just an illusion.

Britain doesn't have a constitution, so it's not like a state can't exist without one.

Again, I'm just arguing against the belief that constitutional rules are somehow immune to corruption or even an obstacle for usurpers. Nothing more.

StrangeRobot fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Oct 7, 2011

# ? Oct 7, 2011 22:47

hankor: May 7, 2009; The feast is not the most important meal of the day.
Breakfast is!

StrangeRobot posted:

By the way, what do you think of the EnBW acquisition case having been decided now in B-W? (it's not the BVerfG, but still an interesting case of a violation of a state constitution, by CDU people, with no real consequences for them or their friends on the horizon, like we talked about earlier)

Wait what, lobbyism isn't systemic political corruption now? Also Germany isn't a signatory of UNCAC. What about that?

And to construct a legally valid case of political corruption in German law as of right now is supposedly virtually impossible(I'm unsure here, but you're the law man so maybe you can clear that claim up). Your commentary here?

The EnBW-acquisition stinks there is no doubt about that. But do they really get off without consequences? The recent ruling was about wether the acquisition was constitutional or not, the court says no. This doesn't have direct consequences for them, I give you that. This doesn't mean however that there won't be further cases against Mappus and St�chele concerning embezzlement (yeah I know that they currently refuse to do that) or for the compensation of damages. It's fairly recent so you have to give them time.

Lobbyism isn't systemic political corruption, lobbyist do different things than just handing over bags full of money all day long. The job of a lobbyist is to represent interest groups, this means to bring the interests of a certain group to the attention of politicians. A friend of mine works for a lobbyist that is tied to weapons manufacturers and the pharmaceutical industry (aka the two most evil entities known to man) and sure enough they do walk a thin line.

Lobbyism in itself is not a bad thing, politicians need to be in contact with major players of the society and the economy, since this can lead to some rather shady business it has to be tightly watched. By the way Germany did sign the UNCAC it just hasn't been ratified yet.

I don't specialize in corruption or the constitution for that matter but from what I can gather from journals and commentaries you'd have a pretty solid case if somebody would give money to a politician to vote a certain way.

StrangeRobot posted:

Apart from that. We have the erosion of workers' rights, wage stagnation and rampant unemployment while capital gains income is higher than ever, coincidence? We also do that "war" thing again.

No, True, gently caress no, the capital income tax was raised in 2009, Maybe It's coincidence that things changed it could also be planned or because German politicians can't control the world I don't know , you seem to remember "Von deutschem Boden soll niemals wieder Krieg ausgehen.". Doesn't necessarily mean we won't join existing ones does it?

hankor fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Oct 8, 2011

# ? Oct 8, 2011 00:10

cremnob: Jun 30, 2010

Hi German goons, I'd like for you to give me an objective opinion about an article I read in Foreign Affairs about Germany's recent rise to becoming an economic jugernaut, and Agenda 2010's impact on that. I realize most goons are overwhelmingly liberal so I am not sure if this will be possible, but we'll see what happens.

quote:

The Secrets of Germany's Success

What Europe's Manufacturing Powerhouse Can Teach America

Steven Rattner
STEVEN RATTNER is former Counselor to the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury and former Lead Auto Adviser in the Obama administration.

As Americans fret about persistent economic challenges, particularly high unemployment, a nearly opposite mood pervades Germany. Neither the economic crises in the rest of the eurozone nor the instability in the Middle East has dampened a deep-seated conviction among German business leaders and economists that two decades after the costly reintegration of East Germany the country has reestablished its position as an economic juggernaut.

Germany's optimism appears warranted: whereas unemployment in the United States rose during the recent economic recession, from 4.6 percent in 2007 to 9.0 percent in 2011 (seasonally adjusted), in Germany, it fell, from 8.5 percent to 7.1 percent. For the first time since 1992, fewer than three million Germans are unemployed. By the time U.S. President Barack Obama was telling Americans in his January 2011 State of the Union address that the United States needed to double its exports, Germany had quietly become the world's second-largest exporter (after China). Indeed, Germany's exports have contributed two-thirds of the country's economic growth over the past decade and have driven its GDP per capita to increase faster than that of any other major industrialized country.

When it comes to boosting exports, of course, the need to maintain or even increase the size of the manufacturing sector, in particular, has been an article of faith in major developed countries for decades. Politicians and voters alike believe that having companies that "make something" is a key element of economic success, in part because manufacturing jobs have historically paid above average wages. For its part, Germany embraced manufacturing, and much of its economic success is thanks to that decision.

THE MITTELSTAND MIRACLE

Germans credit both their public and their private sectors for their country's success. Germany's government, particularly under Gerhard Schr�der, who was chancellor from 1998 to 2005, played an important role in the country's economic growth. In early 2005, Schr�der pushed through parliament a massive reform program called Agenda 2010. Doing so was politically costly for the chancellor. His party suffered a major loss in that spring's regional election, and when Schr�der called for an early general election in the fall that year, he was defeated. But Agenda 2010 survived and successfully rolled back the German welfare state by, among other things, paring unemployment benefits to encourage work, relaxing stultifying regulatory practices, and forging a grand bargain with labor unions whereby the unions agreed to hold down wages and the government assured job security for workers.

This greater job security was afforded in large measure through a "short work" scheme: workers' total number of hours were reduced to avoid layoffs, and the government covered part of their lost salaries. Approximately 1.5 million Germans were enrolled in the program at its peak, in May 2009, at a cost to the government of 4.6 billion euros that year alone. According to a 2009 report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the program saved approximately 500,000 jobs during the recent economic recession.

Of at least equal importance was the role of the private sector, especially the innumerable small and medium-sized manufacturing firms known as the Mittelstand. These companies combine the advantages of stable family ownership with a focus on producing sophisticated goods that emerging markets cannot easily replicate. As Germans like to say, "We make the thing that goes inside the thing that goes inside the thing." Although family-owned businesses can be a mixed blessing, of course -- they are subject to familial strife and succession problems -- the overall success of these companies is widely acknowledged. The Mittelstand now employ millions of people and seem to put a higher priority on employing Germans than do publicly traded multinational giants. Many Germans believe that since the Mittelstand are privately owned, they focus more on long-term growth than short-term profits.

A significant portion of Germany's industrial success can be traced to two manufacturing sectors. The first, heavily dominated by the Mittelstand, includes companies that build the sophisticated machine tools that emerging markets need as they develop their own manufacturing capabilities. This might sound like selling arms to one's adversary, but it has worked well for Germany. The second sector includes Germany's marquee auto brands -- BMW, Daimler, Porsche, Audi, and the like. Automakers are, of course, central to the German economy, composing about 20 percent of GDP. In particular, high-end cars have become hot commodities for affluent consumers in booming new markets, such as China, which alone accounts for 25 percent of BMW's global profits.

Some have warned that Germany's economy is overly export-dependent and vulnerable to the vicissitudes of the global economy, but the country's success as an exporter has created a virtuous circle that has instead strengthened the German economy. More exports have generated more profits and created more jobs, and these in turn have fueled domestic demand for consumer products. Germany's exports in February 2011 were 21 percent higher than a year earlier, and its imports were 27 percent higher.

BAD FOR EU, GOOD FOR ME

Although Germany's public and private sectors deserve enormous credit for their accomplishments, the reasons for the country's economic triumph are more complicated. Not all of Germany's economic policies -- especially its decision to hold down wages -- have had positive effects. According to a December 2010 International Labor Organization report, real earnings in the country dropped by 4.5 percent over the past decade. In other words, even as Germany was selling more and finding innovative ways to keep more of its citizens employed, it was failing to provide most Germans with an improved standard of living. And inevitably, wages can be held down only for so long in an otherwise healthy economy. Accordingly, real wages have begun to rise -- by 1.5 percent in 2010 -- marginally eroding German competitiveness.

At the same time, the short-work program adversely affected productivity: between 2007 and 2009, GDP per employee fell by five percent in Germany while rising by two percent in the United States. The tension between maximizing productivity, or competitiveness, and maximizing employment is something almost all developed countries face. In some ways, Germany and the United States are on opposite ends of this spectrum. Germany maximized employment, and its GDP suffered; the flexible U.S. economy tends to maximize productivity, and it has a higher unemployment rate as a result.

Meanwhile, the introduction of the euro in 1999 quietly brought Germany another advantage: it fused the country to others whose competitiveness, as measured by the cost of each unit of labor, had stagnated, particularly Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain, but also France. Meanwhile, since 1999, Germany's competitiveness has increased by nearly 20 percent. Germany wins more business worldwide when it competes against other eurozone countries to sell its exports, and it even outperforms them in their home markets. About 80 percent of Germany's trade surplus comes from its trade with the rest of the European Union.

The eurozone's weak economic performance and the simmering sovereign debt crises in several peripheral eurozone countries have kept the value of the euro well below what the deutsche mark would be worth today if it still existed. (According to some estimates, if Germany abandoned the euro, its currency would immediately appreciate by 30 to 40 percent.) This gives Germany an enormous competitive trade advantage over countries with their own, more expensive currencies, such as the United Kingdom and the United States. The economic stimulus from the undervaluation of the euro has been so powerful that the biggest economic worry in Germany today is that the economy will overheat and trigger inflation.

LEARNING GERMANY'S LESSONS

Whatever its flaws, the German model shows that a developed country can remain competitive even in a world where new economic giants, such as China, India, and others, are emerging. To accomplish this requires determined political leadership -- of the kind that Schr�der displayed in 2005 -- as well as figuring out the right ways to exploit a country's comparative advantages. Germany has succeeded in large part through its focus on specialized manufacturing and marquee brands. Given the vastly lower labor costs and quickly rising productivity in the developing world, emphasizing the top of the value-added chain is the surest way forward for advanced economies. In 2009, General Motors' labor costs were $55 per hour in the United States, $7 in Mexico, $4.50 in China, and $1 in India for the same types of work. Although productivity in Mexico, China, and India was lower than in the United States, the difference in wages more than compensated.

As the German example has shown, superior products, and at least some with significant brand recognition, can buoy an entire economy. Even though locally produced Buicks are a huge success in China, the United States may not have auto brands with enough marquee value to compete widely for China's high-end consumers. But it does have an enviable global edge in several high-growth sectors, including social media (Google and Facebook), entertainment, technology, and finance.

The United States will also have to be realistic, however. Given the high rates of investment in the developing countries and the fact that these countries' workers are becoming increasingly skilled, even the smartest government policies cannot keep the U.S. economy's share of global manufacturing exports from declining. This will mean more human dislocation, which Washington should work to ameliorate. Creative approaches along the lines of Germany's Agenda 2010 would help. Although the short-work program has had its disadvantages, by spreading available work across a broader pool of laborers, it prevented some of the wrenching social costs, such as high unemployment, that the United States has recently experienced. And just as Germany has profited from its focus on producing highly trained engineers, the United States would benefit from better technical training programs.

The United States may also find inspiration in Germany's growing focus on encouraging new industries, such as the alternative energy sector. In typical German fashion, its green-energy companies manufacture mainly niche products, such as components for solar panels and machine tools for building parts for solar devices. Thanks to new laws encouraging investment in green energy, last year Germany's green-energy industry received $41 billion in new investment, compared with $34 billion in the United States. Such government interventions can, of course, create a slippery slope, with all the attendant risks of poor execution and management. But at least some of these risks can be mitigated if the government insists that its capital be used to leverage private investment.

Germany has lived off exporting to other markets for a long time. The United States would benefit from nurturing such an orientation in its own economy. In Germany, even the Mittelstand business owners are international. Many have lived and worked outside of Germany and speak excellent English -- the global language of business. Obama's rhetoric about doubling exports represents at least a first step toward achieving greater U.S. focus on world markets.

The challenges of globalization for developed countries -- and particularly for these countries' workers -- are real. Germany's success as an exporter of niche manufactured goods has not been unambiguous, but on balance, the German example shows that a combination of good private-sector performance and a sensible policy approach can encourage real growth, even in the West. Absent a more thoughtful approach, U.S. industry is likely to find itself under unrelenting pressure as globalization inexorably grows.

# ? Oct 8, 2011 03:30

az: Dec 2, 2005

cremnob posted:

Hi German goons, I'd like for you to give me an objective opinion about an article I read in Foreign Affairs about Germany's recent rise to becoming an economic jugernaut, and Agenda 2010's impact on that. I realize most goons are overwhelmingly liberal so I am not sure if this will be possible, but we'll see what happens.

It is not a recent rise, it's been a long development. Germany used to be the worlds number one export nation before China took that place and pushed Germany to number two, contrary what the article claims.
Maintaining strong manufacturing sectors has been a key element to the overall strength of the economy, mainly chemicals, industrial hardware, metalworking goods, cars etc.
The so called short work program is a terrible tool that creates an unneccessary middle-man agency between employer and employee, effectively depressing the employees wage. The employee in this situation has no negotionable position or labor union support. Their only choice is to either accept the work and wage without question, or drop into the unemployment pool. The catch there is that work agencies actively force both long and short term unemployed into accepting such work under threat of cutting benefits if they do not comply.
They tried to do that with me when I was in between jobs. I left work in July and had a contract to begin working for a different employer in february of the next year, spending the in-between time with study programs. The work agency covered six months of unemployment time, after that I'd been covered by social security. In a fit of bureaucratic insanity they tried to force me into short term work in january, working the assembly line in a car tire factory 500 miles away from where I lived and was about to work again, despite me proving that I was about to employed again full time in march. I had to threaten sueing the entire agency until they let me be.

# ? Oct 8, 2011 07:03

elwood: Mar 28, 2001; by Smythe

az posted:

The so called short work program is a terrible tool that creates an unneccessary middle-man agency between employer and employee, effectively depressing the employees wage.

From what I understand the article talks about short work (Kurzarbeit) not temp work (Zeitarbeit).

# ? Oct 8, 2011 07:45

Einbauschrank: Nov 5, 2009

StrangeRobot posted:

So?

First of all you brought up the Nazis because "We weren't as bad as National-Socialists" is considered as the moral high ground among socialists. Then you seem to suffer from bad reading comprehension. To remind you of your own articulations:

StrangeRobot posted:

You're a complete nutter if you seriously think the GDR and the loving third Reich are anywhere on the same scale of evil.

The paragraph "The Linke would be comparable to" was introduced by my statement

"There is a difference between leaving a party that was the main pillar of a dictatorship and becoming a member of a democratic party and between staying in a renamed party that was the main pillar of a dictatorship."

So I am comparing the SED with the NSDAP in their respective function as being the "main pillar of a dictatorship". Nowhere do I rate them on a "Scale of Evil". Unless you deny that the GDR was a dictatorship and the SED was the main pillar of this dictatorship I don't see how you can find fault in my statement. Do you deny that the GDR was a dictatorship?

Same goes for my statement "Many NSDAP members even worked for the GDR and exchanged one dictatorship for the next." The only thing I am comparing and setting equal is "dictatorship". Do you deny that they were exchanging one dictatorship for the next?

quote:

Also for a guy who claims to care about bad people getting of the hook in Germany you just handwave the Nazis away? The worst case of what you claim to be against just doesn't count because it's too long ago? Are you kidding me?

The Nazis are dead or senile and their party was forbidden and doesn't exist anymore neither does anyone form a coalition with them. I am not in a habit of kicking dead horses if there are real dangers still alive.

quote:

You're all "never forget!" about a bunch of one-party police state with badly managed command economy types but the mass murdering rapists who tried to exterminate several ethnicities, murdered a fuckload of Germans(in death camps or by sending them to fight their war of conquest and extermination) and literally uncountable amounts of foreigners and left Germany standing as a pile of burned rubble before giving the command to basically commit national suicide are just "too long ago"? gently caress that!

I don't see even a remote danger of another round of Nazi-induced raping, followed by genocide and suicide on a nationwide level. Do you?

Neither do I see how you (the person) are fighting dead Nazis by instrumentalizing them to whitewash the Linke, a political party and ideology that is rooted in dictatorship and oppression.

quote:

There's also an unbroken line of continuity between the Third Reich and the FRG, so? Or depending on who you ask the FRG even IS the Third Reich. Also it's the GDR. Or the direct continuation of the GDR. It gets confusing now.

The FRG has made clear that it renounces racism and socialism and has chosen to take on responsibility for two dictatorships (and that's why they chose continuity: to not shirk responsibility), paying -meagre- reparations to the victims of Socialism and National-Socialism. I don't accuse the SED/Linke of racism (apart from the occasional bout of antisemitism) but I certainly don't see how the Linke is renouncing Socialism.

Neither do I see the Linke paying for the damage they have done in the 40 years of socialist dictatorship. On the contrary, they are regularly showing disrespect for the victims of Socialism. Simply look up what is going on every 13. of August when civilized people are commemorating the victims of socialism you can count on "die Linke" to disturb this moment.

Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 10:21 on Oct 8, 2011

# ? Oct 8, 2011 10:18

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

cremnob posted:

Hi German goons, I'd like for you to give me an objective opinion about an article I read in Foreign Affairs about Germany's recent rise to becoming an economic jugernaut, and Agenda 2010's impact on that. I realize most goons are overwhelmingly liberal so I am not sure if this will be possible, but we'll see what happens.

The article is basically correct. Even as an unrepentant leftist socialist, I do think that the Agenda 2010, was necessary, though it was sloppily implemented and a lot of it's elements were a bit naive, like the idea that cheap temp work translates into well paid proper jobs, the 1�-Job debacle, the unemployment agency subsidizing slave wage jobs (Hartz IV-Aufstocker) etc. The idea that you could remain on unemployment benefits in the magnitude of some 60% or so of your last paycheck, like it was before, couldn't be carried on forever and basically precluded any downward mobility.

I especially like how the article points out a problem, that is conveniently overlooked by German politicians and media alike. Trade surpluses on side mean trade deficts on other sides, meaning Germany is creating a lot of debt in Europe. We sell our admittedly fine products to our neighbours, but don't return the favor in buying their stuff, because our wages were kept low during the last two decades. Then the money is used to finance foreign debt, so they can buy more of our stuff, until the foreigners are basically bankrupt.

It's a like the problem between China and the US, China exports stuff to the US, by keeping their prices artificially low (by undervaluing their currency) and thus not importing US products but using the earned money to finance the US so they buy more Chinese stuff.

When Christine Lagarde was still the French finance minister and once made a comment on exactly the same thing (France produces a lot of luxury products, like fine food and clothing that don't export so well to Germans that are shopping at discounters, because their wages have been kept short for the last two decades), the outcry in Germany was massive "We're not artificially strengthening our competitiveness through austerity, but are only exporting so much because we're awesome, and other countries should make better products, or learn to be as frugal as we are", I kid you not.

It's almost like a renaissance of 17th century mercantilism. It's not sustainable.

DeusEx fucked around with this message at 12:05 on Oct 8, 2011

# ? Oct 8, 2011 12:02

cremnob: Jun 30, 2010

That's interesting. The article also mentions that real wages are beginning to rise but doesn't get in-depth. What is that attributed to?

# ? Oct 8, 2011 19:54

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

cremnob posted:

That's interesting. The article also mentions that real wages are beginning to rise but doesn't get in-depth. What is that attributed to?

People being finally fed up in not participating in growth and politicians grudgingly agreeing with them to pacify the growing discontent.

# ? Oct 8, 2011 20:26

ArchangeI: Jul 15, 2010

quote:

Hi German goons, I'd like for you to give me an objective opinion about an article I read in Foreign Affairs about Germany's recent rise to becoming an economic jugernaut, and Agenda 2010's impact on that. I realize most goons are overwhelmingly liberal so I am not sure if this will be possible, but we'll see what happens.

Liberals in the American or in the European sense? Because the Agenda 2010 was widely seen as an outburst of ~~freedom~~ neo-liberalism.

However, I do agree with DeusEx (you are off the party line, comerade!) that it was necessary to make a deep seated reform of the welfare system, and it certainly did help our competitiveness. However, it was a very bitter pill to swallow for many. In many ways, it was a Nixon going to China sort of thing - had the current government tried to implement something like that, the opposition would have cried bloody murder.

As others have already said, it did create a great range of, frankly, unethical situations by basically reducing welfare to the point where you have to work to sustain even the most modest standard of living. Hartz IV (the last stage of a program to reform unemployment benefits and reemployment measures, now synonymous for the basic welfare) pays enough for food and shelter, and that is it. It has something like 60 cents per month for discretionary spending on cultural endevours (going to the movies). It is barely enough to get by as an healthy, childless adult - anything else will have problems.

The problem with programs that try to encourage work is that there have to be free jobs to begin with. Many of the people in Hartz IV are people with few or no marketable skills, and like the article said - Germany runs on being innovative and producing highly specialized components and machinery. You need engineers for that (and we have a shortage of them), not unskilled workers. Which ties us back to the school system we already discussed. On the other hand, it certainly beats having to participate in a race to the bottom as far as wages are concerned.

Finally, the jugernaut is not percieved as such by the German population. Being second place on the export-o-meter was mostly seen as a relative decline in power (which it was). But Germans are a fearful people anyway - the lower class is afraid that the money won't last to the end of the month, the middle class is afraid that they will lose their jobs and become part of the lower class, the upper class is afraid of another economic breakdown forcing them to become part of the middle class. The economic strength does not come with a feeling of it, rather with a feeling of extreme economic vulnerability. Sooner or later the growth in China will level off, and then we are hosed good and proper. Or the US defaults on its debts. Or we hit peak oil or whatever. A heavy export-oriented economy is not necessarily a very stable economy, and for many Germans, stability is preferable to overall wealth (which is why managers have such a bad reputation here).

# ? Oct 8, 2011 20:54

cremnob: Jun 30, 2010

All things considered, do you think Agenda 2010 should have been implemented? The left in America frequently look at Europe as the Socialist Utopia ideal to strive for yet here we have the country that is currently keeping the EU alive, seemingly doing the exact opposite.

So I'd like to know, did going down this path make Germany better off?

# ? Oct 8, 2011 22:36

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

cremnob posted:

All things considered, do you think Agenda 2010 should have been implemented? The left in America frequently look at Europe as the Socialist Utopia ideal to strive for yet here we have the country that is currently keeping the EU alive, seemingly doing the exact opposite.

So I'd like to know, did going down this path make Germany better off?

Rarrgh, I hate this notion by North American college leftists, that Europe is somehow a socialistic place. I mean it's perhaps understandable from an US perspective to call everything that is less than total exploitation as socialist, but overall the EU countries, especially since the fall of the wall, a very much of a capitalistic nature, with some minimum provisions for human decency, like affordable health care for everyone. Also the European countries differ very much in their systems and Germany has been always more on the capitalistic side of things, than say France, but less than the UK. Just ask some US expats that live in Europe, whether they feel that they live in some some socialist paradise or just in some differently organized capitalist system.

The reasons for Germany current success, are manifold, like it was discussed in the article you quoted, and as we have discussed so far. Like I said, even as a leftist, I say the the Agenda 2010 was necessary, though very naively implemented, because the previous unemployment system was a little bit ridiculous. But in itself it wasn't the main reason for German growth, but that we still have an industrial base and didn't bought so much into the real estate and financial bubble economies, that were popularized first in the US and then some other European states. The Agenda 2010 put helped to put further pressure on already stagnating wages, thus improving competitiveness and together with the, for German standards at least, undervalued Euro, we could export the holy crap out of us.

You know that with lowering wages you can always improve your competitiveness in an export oriented economy. The best competitiveness could be achieved if we would reestablish slavery. Perhaps we should do this on our quest for the holy grail of trade surplus ad growth; what do you think?

Think back to the great heroes of industrialization, like Stalin, who transformed the Soviet Union, from a mostly agrarian state, to an industrial powerhouse, fielding the world largest army, nuclear arms, and spaceflight within mere 30 years. It only cost the lives of millions, and enslaving sizable portions of the populace in the gulag system. But you know, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, right?

# ? Oct 9, 2011 08:20

ArchangeI: Jul 15, 2010

If you read the article again you will note that the reason for Germany's success wasn't lowering wages to the point where it could compete with China but the ability to innovate and produce much needed, complicated components. Slaves make poor engineers.

# ? Oct 9, 2011 12:33

DeusEx: Apr 27, 2007

ArchangeI posted:

If you read the article again you will note that the reason for Germany's success wasn't lowering wages to the point where it could compete with China but the ability to innovate and produce much needed, complicated components. Slaves make poor engineers.

I agree and I think I have implied it in my post, but the question was specifically about the effects of the Agenda 2010, which wasn't about enhancing innovations, but about indirectly cutting costs by putting downward pressure on wages.

Cutting work costs will always also improve competitiveness, though it's a morally questionable strategy. Enhancing innovation is always preferred. Both effects are at work in Germany.

DeusEx fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Oct 9, 2011

# ? Oct 9, 2011 13:15

StrangeRobot: Sep 7, 2006

Einbauschrank posted:

The Nazis are dead or senile and their party was forbidden and doesn't exist anymore neither does anyone form a coalition with them. I am not in a habit of kicking dead horses if there are real dangers still alive.

Oh yes, the real dangers of the Linke suddenly handing over their party to the minority of utmost extremists loosely affiliated with them, then completely reversing their programme of democratic socialism, then winning a majority of the vote, no wait: summoning a revolutionary military! And then they'll reestablish a Warsaw Pact satellite state dependent on the threat of immediate Soviet invasion to suppress its populace. Sure thing.

Also it's really funny how you're easily giving even high-ranking Ex-Nazis the benefit of the doubt about changing their views, but a reformed SED is absolutely impossible for you to comprehend.

cremnob posted:

The Secrets of Germany's Success

What Europe's Manufacturing Powerhouse Can Teach America

So what can Germany teach America? I'll reword the article's horrible misrepresentation of reality:

1. Fake unemployment numbers until even foreign journalists believe we have under three million unemployed

2. Use taxes to subsidise business owners who don't have a business model beyond "let the taxpayer pay my emploee's wages, skim the profit"

3. Lower taxes on the rich, but raise consumption taxes so you properly gently caress over the poor

4. Create a parasitic type of middleman between employer and emploee who lives off a percentage of the worker's wage, incentivise the use of those parasites by busineses so that they spread like a plague, your minister of labour will then join the largest of those companies as a member of the board, no connection there just a strange coincidence

5. Change the unemployment benefit statutes so that workers HAVE to work for the parasitic middlemen or become homeless, they will now live in fear and always give in in wage negotiations, force fully educated academics to waste their potential by working as cleaning personell, fully trained engineers will now work collecting the trash in parks and so on

6. Reward the parasitic middlemen with taxpayer money if they hire the unemloyed(I'm not joking this actually happened, is happening)

7. After trapping your high skilled workers in a kafkaesque system of financial doom sqeeze them out to the maximum to produce the excellent products you produced before but now at a much lower price, skilled workers with years of experience will now works for an intern's pay, and oh yeah about that: create an economy of unpaid interns in the hundreds of thousands

8. Don't forget to massively subsidise businesses out of the taxpayer's pocket

9. Enjoy the competitive advantages of a fearaful highly skilled population working for pennies and roll over your all competitors who still treat their workers like people

10. Reduce domestic demand by the above measures, become completely dependant on your exports, bow to whims of the export industry

11. Sell incredible amounts of poo poo to your neighbours that they pay for with debt/obligations

12. Watch your neighbors' economies burn and sink while your upper class accumulates insane amounts of outstanding debits

13. Since your neighbours are broke pay their debts to your upper class with poor people's taxpayer money, that money gets stashed away in tax havens and other private pockets

14. Transfer your only remaining advantage apart from slave like wages, namely technology over to chinese companies

15. Notice you're utterly hosed in the long term and also hated by everyone around you

Truly fine lessons there!

EDIT: spelling

StrangeRobot fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Oct 9, 2011

# ? Oct 9, 2011 19:53

Einbauschrank: Nov 5, 2009

StrangeRobot posted:

Oh yes, the real dangers of the Linke suddenly handing over their party to the minority of utmost extremists loosely affiliated with them, then completely reversing their programme of democratic socialism, then winning a majority of the vote, no wait: summoning a revolutionary military! And then they'll reestablish a Warsaw Pact satellite state dependent on the threat of immediate Soviet invasion to suppress its populace. Sure thing.

If "moderate socialists" are running the party and congratulating dictators like Fidel Castro on his birthday or supporting a newspaper that congratulates the building of the Berlin Wall then I don't dare to know what "extreme socialists" would do.

quote:

Also it's really funny how you're easily giving even high-ranking Ex-Nazis the benefit of the doubt about changing their views, but a reformed SED is absolutely impossible for you to comprehend.

I do not have problems with people leaving extremist parties. I am fine with former SED or Blockfl�ten members who have joined non-extremist parties as long as they didn't commit unpunished crimes. I have a problem with people staying in (or joining) extremist parties even when there is no longer any dictatorship to "nudge" them into party membership. And "reformed socialism" is about as convincing as "reformed racism" or any other "reformed" butcher's ideology with several tens of millions killed and a 90 year track record of dictatorship and poverty.

Anyway, if they wanted to "reform" and renounce the criminal past of state socialism why do they have to do so in the very same party that was responsible for the second German dictatorship? It's not like they were prevented from starting over from scratch instead of building upon the garbage bin of history.

# ? Oct 9, 2011 22:15

Einbauschrank: Nov 5, 2009

cremnob posted:

All things considered, do you think Agenda 2010 should have been implemented? The left in America frequently look at Europe as the Socialist Utopia ideal to strive for yet here we have the country that is currently keeping the EU alive, seemingly doing the exact opposite.

So I'd like to know, did going down this path make Germany better off?

Germany was better off in the 70ies (which is why we could afford a more generous welfare system) but we would be off even worse today without the reforms. There are still many problems attached to Hartz-IV. There are many stupid regulations that can be used as a pretext to harass people. Also, the so called 1-Euro jobbers (people being paid only 1� an hour on top of welfare) lead to a severe distortion of the labour market.

# ? Oct 9, 2011 22:22

V. Illych L.: Apr 11, 2008; ASK ME ABOUT LUMBER

Einbauschrank posted:

If "moderate socialists" are running the party and congratulating dictators like Fidel Castro on his birthday or supporting a newspaper that congratulates the building of the Berlin Wall then I don't dare to know what "extreme socialists" would do.

I do not have problems with people leaving extremist parties. I am fine with former SED or Blockfl�ten members who have joined non-extremist parties as long as they didn't commit unpunished crimes. I have a problem with people staying in (or joining) extremist parties even when there is no longer any dictatorship to "nudge" them into party membership. And "reformed socialism" is about as convincing as "reformed racism" or any other "reformed" butcher's ideology with several tens of millions killed and a 90 year track record of dictatorship and poverty.

Anyway, if they wanted to "reform" and renounce the criminal past of state socialism why do they have to do so in the very same party that was responsible for the second German dictatorship? It's not like they were prevented from starting over from scratch instead of building upon the garbage bin of history.

Your post reads like the reactionary rot it is. From equating socialism to racism, calling the DDR the "Second" German dictatorship (seriously, how loving incredibly ignorant do you have to be for that) to insisting that Die Linke is literally the SED, your post is full of absurdities and tripe.

You brought up the casualty list of socialism - shall we look at whatever socioeconomic system you prefer? I guarantee you that it's longer and more sordid unless you're an anarchist or something. Which you're not.

Capitalism - four hundred years of poverty and dictatorships around the globe!

# ? Oct 9, 2011 23:13

Mr. Smile Face Hat: Sep 15, 2003; Praise be to China's Covid-Zero Policy

V. Illych L. posted:

Capitalism - four hundred years of poverty and dictatorships around the globe!

Some people can never reflect if their ideologies have ever done anything wrong, they can only point to the other side.

I have seen East Germany in person when it was still the GDR. I had relatives there. The material living conditions and the personal freedoms were crap compared to West Germany. You can't reform a turd. But go on pointing to the other side.

Though it's not my kind of thinking, I can understand if people join or vote for a socialist party, but not if there is a direct line back to the East German regime.

# ? Oct 10, 2011 01:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 11, 2024 21:52

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Yeah, as a leftist who isn't all that familiar with German politics, I don't really see why the hell you would join a party that has even loose ties to the state communist party of the DDR. Can't you make a new one? I don't see why you wouldn't just start a new party instead of keeping one with a history like that alive.

edit: And also, people on both sides seem to be pointing to the other. Consider for a moment that maybe capitalism and soviet style authoritarianism are both bad. As an aside, I think well regulated capitalism might not be ideal, but is fine, and I also believe that what the DDR and USSR became is really not related at all to the theoretical aspects of socialism, but a whole mess of other stuff. Russia was basically a hellhole before the revolution, and chaos afterwards during the civil war (helped in no small part by western countries sending troops). Add the fact that the revolutionaries were mostly unfamiliar with the concerns of rural peasants and openly hostile to them in some cases, and the fact that a violent revolution by nature attracts some very unpleasant people (Stalin for one) and things don't turn out well. I'm not defending them at all, but don't lump all leftist thought in with that.

icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Oct 10, 2011

# ? Oct 10, 2011 03:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Germany Thread: KEIN FASCHISMUS LEUDE BIDDE

«‹›2043 »