Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6
Results 101 to 110 of 110

Thread: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

  1. #101
    Ferrets54's Avatar Praefectus Praetorio
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    64,782

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Gäiten View Post
    The parties, especially Merkel has destroyed the state of law.
    Yeah, go on. How?

  2. #102
    Semisalis
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    427

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Gäiten View Post
    Funny, Neo National Socialists are Socialists either.
    This Thread would benefit much from a definition of socialism everybody could agree upon.


    Quote Originally Posted by Gäiten View Post
    Well, each system does have its profiteers.
    I see myself more as a person that doesn`t care much about the system.

  3. #103
    dogukan's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,431

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Instead of trying to take quotes of historical bad guys out of context to create desperate ""parallels" with people you disagree with, let's look at historic events a little bit more soberly:
    Let's start with beginning of XX century.
    WW1 was motivated by globalism. It was major European powers fighting for things like colonies, geopolitical influence, etc.
    Wrong. It was fought due to nationalism. Colonies are NOT "globalism". Globalism is open free trade for everyone. Colonies were MERCANTILISM, the opposite of liberalism.
    The discussion that colonies were a natural consequence of the development of capitalism or material conditions as Marxists would say etc are one thing. But we are talking about the ideological self-definitions here.



    You can make a desperate argument that Ferdinand's assassination was done by a nationalist group, which is trued but be that as it may, it was merely a catalyst to a conflict that was inevitable due to purely globalist geopolitical tendencies of major powers involved.
    As I said above.
    You seem to have no idea regarding what the "internationalist" movement of the period that evolved up to today is based on.
    I'll give you a clue. Internationalists shunned colonies. Again, it can be argued that colonies were not profitable so the organization of cpaitalism had to change etc which would be a Marxist argument. But I am going over the self-identification.

    Hitler was somewhat of a globalist as well,
    Seems like in the following years the revisionist ridiculously will go locol

    while resistance against him in Europe was motivated by ethno-nationalism. Globalist tendencies can also be applied to USSR's "word revolution" and ideas of Churchill and FDR as well.
    HH, dude. I think you should first define what you refer to as "globalism". By your logic, nationalism is also globalism because it wants to expand the nations influence for the benefit of the people in the country at the cost of people in other countries.
    Whatever you do in the GLOBAL SYSTEM has global consequences. That is pretty obvious since we do not live in isolated villages anymore.

    Ethnic nationalism was the leading force behind opposition to both imperialism of NATO and Soviets.
    Ethnic nationalism was used extensively as an anti-imperialist rhetoric...but it was heavily backed by the Soviets. Soviets backed ethnic nationalism globally to reverse western influence. They even backed KMT against Mao in China.
    I don't remember any case where ethnic nationalism was used to revert Soviets until its perhaps last decade. In fact, if you look into politics of the Warsaw Pact countries, they were nationalist to the point of fascism. At the top of my head, I am prety sure the policies and rhetoric of the Bulgarian communist party against Turks would be considered ultra-nationalism by today's standards.

    Moving on to current times, it is needless to say we can hardly attribute Iraq war, Libya war and current conflicts in Syria to nationalism, as main reason behind those were globalist interests of superpowers as well as religious sectarianism, which is globalist by its very nature.
    There are many variables and explanations to explain that.
    But we are talking about the "globalist ideology" of certain people. Not the consequences of global CAPITALISM and its integrated dynamics which are quiet well explained by Marxists that you love to define as globalists...

    My beef here is with your revisionism. Your desire to put everything into "my good nationalism" vs "their bad globalism". Thats not how the world works.


    So there we have it, you are simply ignoring major factors that prove that reality is the exact opposite of what you described - it was nationalism that contributed greatly to Western civilization, its political, technological and ideological achievements, while globalism merely contributed by destroying such achievements, sending world into turmoil and darkness of another intellectual dark age.
    I would invite you to read economic history and some fundemental aspects of innovation and growth economics.
    You are still trying to paint a black and white world through your biases.
    Last edited by dogukan; November 15, 2018 at 02:45 PM.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  4. #104
    dogukan's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,431

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Gäiten View Post
    Germany has lost its democracy. The parties, especially Merkel has destroyed the state of law. Laws are only followed when they do fit their ideologies and agendas.
    And without a state of law, there is no democracy.
    There are reports about this, but they are mostly ignored by the subservient press and media.
    Other medias are ignored by people who do not want to believe this.
    I need 3rd party independent research to prove your claim. I am not disputing that the quality of "democracy" might have decreased or increased. But you are talking in binary terms at the extremities which points to an unhealthy approach where you have other more "devious" intentions in making that claim.
    Germany is still a top notch democracy. Whether Merkel made it worse or better, I do not know. Saying Germany is an autocracy is ridiculous.


    Today you can see that people who do not want to give their sovereignty are called traitors (of the European ideals et cetera). These people are threatened (as Merkel did in their speeches to the end of WkI). Her true authoritarian style.
    Especially the Left is not capable to discuss factually. Without their safe spaces they get hysteric.
    The use of word traitor is an EXTREMELY dangerous trend that shows an amount of extreme polarization and destruction of platform for compromise...which can only lead to terrible things.
    I don't know what Merkel calls people, I just know that this is a global trend. You can argue that the polarization we have reached is merkels or EU's or Jewish financial elites of whatevers fault. That is a different debate.
    That the lines of compromise are getting destroyed is obviously a sign of decline in qualiry of democracy.
    Who is at fault for this, what portion of fault falls on who's shoulders, or whether there is an obvious human error that could have been avoided.
    These would be much deeper discussions I'd avoid here at this time.


    Gender ideology and asylum are industries of their own in Germany. State-sponsored industries because they need taxpayers moneys (there are nor benefits in these, only costs).
    For this money Merkel has gotten much needed very public acclaim by these very well-connected coteries.
    Another socialist economic is the communitisation of the debts of other European countries.
    And the energy transistion.
    Without massive influx of taxpayers money all this would have gone the way of the economic dodo.
    Taxes had always been there. The problem here is your use of the word "socialist" for your ideological biases.
    If you think Germany turned into a socialist economy under Merkel, I reckon you'd think you live right next to Stalin-led politburo in 1960s Frankfurt.

    The "publicization of private debts" and burdening the public with costs is a consequence of neo-liberal capitalist expansion. Not socialism. Unions do not have the lobby power of the big corporate structures that come up with new policy schemes that put the risks on public and profits on themselves. There are many books regarding the use of debts, critiques mostly coming from Marxist scholars. I'd suggest you to have a look at David Harvey's work on how the 2008 crisis was handled, and how the neo-liberalism that got empowered by capitalism's expansion created these conditions of debt-risk publicization.


    This is your opinion. My is different.
    She has created a global-oriented moloch with socialist background (have taxpayers paid for all their ideological dresses-up wrong decisions), hardly a competent and innovative capitalism-based social market industry as her party (CDU) once stood for.
    I specifically read into innovation dynamics of German economy and Merkel, along with many top German tech-giants is working pretty hard to keep Germany's edge. Mittelstands and their market functioning is a priority of the German Federal Republic if you bother to read their reports. You can see all the actions they take.
    Also, merkel along with Schröder had overseen some of the biggest waves of deregulation in Germany, all the while achieving record growth rates and re-vitalizing it in the 2000s to a top-notch performance. And I am saying this as an anti-neoliberal leftist.
    To not have an idea for this, you need to be a very young fella. Thinking Germany got more "socialist" under Merkel would be a pretty back joke even back in 2005.

    The world would be a better place if everyone left their ideological circlejerk centers and searched&read genuine, honest data before making up their opinions.

    Funny, Neo National Socialists are Socialists either.


    Not sure what you mean here.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  5. #105
    Ludicus's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    10,077

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrets54 View Post
    She led the EU's response to the sovereign debt crisis... an enduring austerity scheme to stabilise the wayward state's finances,.
    Here, we have a different point of view.Portugal Has Emerged as Europe's Booming Anti-Germany – Foreign ...
    Reject austerity to defeat populism, Portugal's socialist prime minister

    Portugal rejection of austerity under a leftist government has stopped populism from taking root...and restored trust in EU there
    That's exactly what happened.Opinion polling for the next Portuguese legislative election

    But it is also true that we praise Merkel for showing real leadership over refugee crisis - and above all, Merkel's defense of European values, in this quasi-medieval age of hyper-nationalisms and illiberal democracies. Merkel is, most certainly, the future President of the European commision.

    Costa elogia Merkel por estar “do lado certo daquilo que são os ... - Eco ( to sum up, Merkel is on the right side of history, says our socialist prime-minister)

    Here, we need more immigration and we won't tolerate any xenophobic rhetoric.
    Last edited by Ludicus; November 15, 2018 at 07:01 PM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

  6. #106

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by dogukan View Post
    Wrong. It was fought due to nationalism. Colonies are NOT "globalism". Globalism is open free trade for everyone. Colonies were MERCANTILISM, the opposite of liberalism.
    The discussion that colonies were a natural consequence of the development of capitalism or material conditions as Marxists would say etc are one thing. But we are talking about the ideological self-definitions here.
    As I said above.
    You seem to have no idea regarding what the "internationalist" movement of the period that evolved up to today is based on.
    I'll give you a clue. Internationalists shunned colonies. Again, it can be argued that colonies were not profitable so the organization of cpaitalism had to change etc which would be a Marxist argument. But I am going over the self-identification.
    I don't think you understand that that globalism comes in various types. Market globalism is only one of those aspects, and as I pointed with US/NATO's recent barbaric destruction of Middle East and North Africa, it doesn't really bring anything good either.
    Clearly both Central Power and Entente were globalist organizations that were seeking typically globalist goals.
    Seems like in the following years the revisionist ridiculously will go locol
    Or that you are desperately trying to defend predatory practices of Western political establishment by denying the history of their application.
    HH, dude. I think you should first define what you refer to as "globalism". By your logic, nationalism is also globalism because it wants to expand the nations influence for the benefit of the people in the country at the cost of people in other countries.
    Whatever you do in the GLOBAL SYSTEM has global consequences. That is pretty obvious since we do not live in isolated villages anymore.
    I'm just going by conventional definition of the term. Also I don't think you definition of nationalism is correct at all, which explains the factually incorrect assertions that you are making.
    Ethnic nationalism was used extensively as an anti-imperialist rhetoric...but it was heavily backed by the Soviets. Soviets backed ethnic nationalism globally to reverse western influence. They even backed KMT against Mao in China.
    I don't remember any case where ethnic nationalism was used to revert Soviets until its perhaps last decade. In fact, if you look into politics of the Warsaw Pact countries, they were nationalist to the point of fascism. At the top of my head, I am prety sure the policies and rhetoric of the Bulgarian communist party against Turks would be considered ultra-nationalism by today's standards.
    Um, what? Soviets actually suppressed nationalism within their own borders, and there were all kinds of nationalist movements that opposed them from Russian emigrant societies after Civil War to various nationalist movements in Warsaw Pact countries. Again, clearly you are either terribly misinformed or are just trying to bend reality to fit your political views.
    There are many variables and explanations to explain that.
    But we are talking about the "globalist ideology" of certain people. Not the consequences of global CAPITALISM and its integrated dynamics which are quiet well explained by Marxists that you love to define as globalists...

    My beef here is with your revisionism. Your desire to put everything into "my good nationalism" vs "their bad globalism". Thats not how the world works.
    That's not what I am saying. At this point, nationalism is definitely a force of good, since it is opposed to governments and organizations that are harmful to Europeans in particular and to the world in general.
    I would invite you to read economic history and some fundemental aspects of innovation and growth economics.
    You are still trying to paint a black and white world through your biases.
    All you did is make up some crazy definitions which have nothing to do with their conventional counter-parts to defend the current governments in Europe which are desperately trying to suppress nationalism.
    By means of ever more effective methods of mind-manipulation, the democracies will change their nature; the quaint old forms -- elections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the rest -- will remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of non-violent totalitarianism. All the traditional names, all the hallowed slogans will remain exactly what they were in the good old days. Democracy and freedom will be the theme of every broadcast and editorial [...]. Meanwhile the ruling oligarchy and its highly trained elite of soldiers, policemen, thought-manufacturers and mind-manipulators will quietly run the show as they see fit.
    -
    Aldous Huxley, Brave New World Revisited, 1958

  7. #107

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    Here, we need more immigration and we won't tolerate any xenophobic rhetoric.
    Here, we need less emotional drama on state affairs.

    Our immigrants here leave anyway to richer countries where they get better pay and better living conditions, so easy to brag about receiving immigrants when they all leave the house and you don't have to deal with it.

    Kinda reaping the "humanist cool points" from the efforts of richer countries rather than our own.
    It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

    -George Orwell

  8. #108

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by fkizz View Post
    Here, we need less emotional drama on state affairs.

    Our immigrants here leave anyway to richer countries where they get better pay and better living conditions, so easy to brag about receiving immigrants when they all leave the house and you don't have to deal with it.

    Kinda reaping the "humanist cool points" from the efforts of richer countries rather than our own.
    And the problem with that is...?

  9. #109
    Mithradates's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    1,435

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Would you like if your neighbour should decide how you should spend your money?

  10. #110
    Praepositus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,643

    Default Re: Angela Merkel Will Step Down in 2021

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithradates View Post
    Would you like if your neighbour should decide how you should spend your money?
    In some circumstances my neighbour does. For example if my neighbour is elected Prime Minister they direct a lot of public policy that spends my taxes. If our fence rots both adjoining property owners have to pay for reasonable repair.

    Humans are stronger for contributing to entities larger than themselves or their nuclear families. For example Germany has knit Europe closer together with its courageous alliance with France, and Merkel has kept the EU strong despite sabotage from Russia and the US.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •