Switch Theme:

Debate: Is Chancellor Merkel's time up as Germany's leader?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Will Merkel still be Chancellor at the end of 2018?
Yes 47% [ 29 ]
No 44% [ 27 ]
Don't Know 10% [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 62
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

Interesting opinion piece in The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/04/angela-merkel-chancellor-far-right-voters

Her problems include:

Coalition talks that have dragged on for weeks to no avail. A government may not be formed until April.

The rise of AfD and a backlash against her immigration policies.

Brexit, which means the German tax payer will have to stump up more to fill the gap of Britain's EU payments.

Voter fatigue that eventually does for all long serving leaders.


Admittedly, Merkel has been written off before, but there does seem to be the feeling of a sea change over her leadership. It could be, like Britain's PM, that Merkel hangs on because there is no alternative Chancellor. That's never good for any country.

I freely admit to not being an expert on German politics, so what does everybody else think?

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





I would not write her off so quickly. As the article shows opinions might change on Merkel, but it also depends on who you exactly ask of course.

The problems are a bit imaginary in some aspects. Coalition talks dragging on might happen from time to time and are not always a sign of failling on Merkel's part. It depends on what is demanded from you in those talks. In the same sense Schultz kinda pushed Merkel into a corner by saying he would't form a government with her so she first went for alternative options. Now the SPD might give in, but if not there might be new elections.

Which brings us to voter fatigue. Not really I would say. While the 2017 CDU/CSU result wasn't great, it was roughly in line with that of 2005 and 2009 during which Merkel began as leader. 2013 was the outlier in voter share. So yes, relative to 2013 her popularity declined (her massive share also has to do with the FDP collapse in 2013 and lower turnout), but she didn't need her 2013 popularity in either 2005 or 2009. So unless she dives under those two years next time its hard to say if its really voter fatigue or just the undecided voters moving on to the next flavor of the month.

Speaking of fotm, the AfD. The majority of votes still went to parties with a pro-immigration stance. While blown up to be big it also just remains a single issue. It is important to put the size of the AfD into context. Even though it is now the third party in Germany, it really isn't that much bigger than the last three parties in Germany. Plus its easier to rise than to actually keep it together as the AfD has already shown. The AfD collected the populist semi right wing protest vote which is great for them. But if they won't get anything done and keep pumping out scandals while the next German government might work on some of the issues, what will happen to the AfD? The AfD isn't really coherent as you might have noticed, being run by seemingly sensible and intelligent people combined with barely in the closet Nazi sympathizers. The AfD just doesn't have the broader appeal (sure they got 12% of the vote, but this was the best they did under the amazing conditions presented to them) when getting PR like that and running on anti immigration, because a majority of Germans don't see them as a serious option (or are pro immigration). Even if the AfD got bigger, its still too toxic for the other parties. Plus with immigration winding down compared to what it was the previous Merkel term, will it remain such a prominent issue? Difficult questions, but its hard to see the AfD evolve beyond the protest platform being run the way it is and already busy shedding its reasonable elements it got on board for the 2017 election.

As for Brexit and EU payments? That's not a Merkel issue, its a Germany/EU issue. Its unavoidable no matter who's in charge. Sure it might dent her popularity for the next elections depending on how it unfolds, but most Germans are still pro EU.

So what I think? The writer of the article has a very short term memory. Merkel's 2013 popularity was exceptional, not her 2017 results. Sure its historically 'low', but that's because of issues such as overall turnout. Practically speaking she did in line with her 2005 and 2009 electoral victories. So why does she as the article says need to win back far right voters? Yes some might have been on her side in 2013, but she didn't need them in 2005, 2009 or 2017 as it turns out. If she forms a government with the SPD what use are those far right voters?

A far riskier prospect to her survival is internal friction in the CDU/CSU, not what the AfD or their voters think.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/04 13:01:06


Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

Good post Disciple.

In reply to your point about the AfD, I'll say this:

UKIP has shown us that even a party with small support, and minimal representation in parliament(or the German version)

can still shape the political narrative. UKIP succeeded in panicking the British elite into a EU referendum and by shifting focus onto immigration.

I don't like Farage, but if you measure a politician's success by what he achives, then Farage is one of the most influential European politicians since 1945.

AfD don't need to win a majority. If they can control the narrative and get people talking about what they want to talk about i.e immigration,

then in a sense, they have already 'won.'

And we see this happening across all of Europe with the mainstream parties - France being a good example.

Personally, I think Merkel will limp on for the sole reason there is nobody else, which is a terrible position for any democracy to find itself in

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





But you hit the nail on the head though, the AfD already controlled the narrative and this is what they managed in voter shares in a country with an electoral system miles easier to succeed in than the UK. 12% is what they got in the absolute 'best' circumstances with a large amount of refugees in the 2013-2017 years and the belief in a populist spring. Unless all of Syria decides to come over now, how will the AfD top that beneficial PR (to them) these past years?

Plus UKIP had a much much easier opponent to flog votes with the EU. While the AfD has to depend on the nebelous concept of immigration that is significantly down compared to a few years ago. While UKIP could combine immigration, sovereignity and economic issues in a dark EU 'cloud' so to speak, the AfD can't. Immigration is pretty much single issue and they got their popularity from the immigration 'wave'. But that wave is over and the issue will be slowly pushed back while other issues come forward. Plus the EU would be an omnipresent issue for UKIP to bang on about if remain had won, but with decent policies immigration/integration doesn't have to be a permanent issue.

Plus you have to take into account the media enviroment which is completely different as well as the public opinion. Immigration isn't nearly as divisive in Germany as the EU is in the UK. Sure its big, but not approaching an almost 50-50 split big. Furthermore while Farage lies a lot and is in general a less than pleasent person, he isn't nearly as bad as the public faces of the AfD. Some of whom include the guy who thinks Germany should be proud of their massive war crime comitting Wehrmacht past.

The AfD isn't comparable to UKIP but more the Front National and Wilders. Both around for years if not decades with success going up and down, but always just out of reach of true coherent platforms and power due to the pervasive stink around them for most voters. Yeah they might be annoying to have around for other parties, but it shows you can live with them without them getting too much in the way so to speak.

On the note of their being nobody else, there are, just none who manage to pull in 1/3 of the popular vote. Merkel is still the most popular candidate by far even though Schultz was seemingly a serious contender for a while. If Merkel gets in for another four years its because that's what the voters wanted, they had other options to vote for, she is the best choice for the CDU/CSU and still pretty popular by most proportional representation democracies standards. Our PM isn't nearly as popular as Merkel is for example in voter share.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and btw your poll might end up badly representing off topic due to how the poll is phrased and the title is, as people answering no based on the title would have to say yes based on the poll question. Mistakes are likely to be made in that.

This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2018/01/04 13:49:59


Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in ie
Calculating Commissar




Frostgrave

If UKIP didn't share an anti-EU stance with some fairly major Tory party members, politicians and donors, where they potentially provide the margin between getting power and not, then they wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

Farage is a nobody, propelled to 'fame' by Tory euro-skeptics and the BBC's attempts to give air time to all view points, regardless of merit. He's pretty much ignored in the EU and only of interest to the UK media when he agrees with them and can be trotted out to say something. He's got a single issue, and now that it's somehow gone his way he's completely irrelevant again.

His influence, here, is because he became a totem for the anti-EU movement; he's not provided anything other than some populist sound bits and smug pictures. He's provided no useful guidance, or policies, or anything.

Oh how we wants to be a somebody.


On the other hand, I don't see Merkel going anywhere.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/04 14:06:33


 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






He's supplied buckets of racism and bigotry.

Don't forget that.

   
Made in gb
Keeper of the Holy Orb of Antioch





avoiding the lorax on Crion

Yeah, she has been inpower a very long time, has aot of baggage but also knows Europe very well too.

Id say she should however choose a time to bow out gracefully than cling on to power by her fingernails. Every poetical career comes to a end at some point, unless your basically a dictator.

Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.

"May the odds be ever in your favour"

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.

FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.  
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Oh and btw your poll might end up badly representing off topic due to how the poll is phrased and the title is, as people answering no based on the title would have to say yes based on the poll question. Mistakes are likely to be made in that.


I have nearly made that mistake, this is very, very poor choice of wording both title and poll question...

On the topic itself - it is very important to look not only at inner German politics, but the overall EU landscape. In the last years, Merkel was unformal EU "backseat" leader, but that is largely comming to end (maybe not immediate, but still). One thing about migration crisis that "general left wing" supporters ignore is that it isn't going away anytime soon and 10-15% of general population feeling unrest about it is a huuuge destabilising factor. Not by "voting power" but by perpetual public debate power which can, in turn, flip everything upside down, given enough time. Combined with huge symptoms of EU integrity degrading (Brexit; Germany coalition stall; silliness of Shultz pushing 7th article vote against Poland; general Germany+France arogance towards smaller central and eastern european members (Nord Stream 2 "backstabbing" is huge deal in the east)) is a completely different landscape than what we had 5-10-15 years ago. Merkel's "iron grip" on EU is no longer a thing and pretty much everyone, including her coalition members, see that. It is not something one recovery from by simple "political games", but by having a clear and most importantly, achievable plan.
But what last couple of years of EU history shown vividly is lack of any real decision making power. EU is at the very best stagnant if not degrading concept altogether.
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





 jhe90 wrote:
Yeah, she has been inpower a very long time, has aot of baggage but also knows Europe very well too.

Id say she should however choose a time to bow out gracefully than cling on to power by her fingernails. Every poetical career comes to a end at some point, unless your basically a dictator.

She might be the 'best' leader in Europe/the EU atm going off experience and ability, which is valuable in itself. It gives a bit of stability to Germany as well.

IDK if or when she would choose to bow out of politics. While she appears as a grey, boring person she seems to have a strong sense of duty to Germany and what she believes is best for Germany. In part that could cloud her vision to a possible successors, but she might have a point n believing she should stay because she currently is the best option.

Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in gb
Keeper of the Holy Orb of Antioch





avoiding the lorax on Crion

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
 jhe90 wrote:
Yeah, she has been inpower a very long time, has aot of baggage but also knows Europe very well too.

Id say she should however choose a time to bow out gracefully than cling on to power by her fingernails. Every poetical career comes to a end at some point, unless your basically a dictator.

She might be the 'best' leader in Europe/the EU atm going off experience and ability, which is valuable in itself. It gives a bit of stability to Germany as well.

IDK if or when she would choose to bow out of politics. While she appears as a grey, boring person she seems to have a strong sense of duty to Germany and what she believes is best for Germany. In part that could cloud her vision to a possible successors, but she might have a point n believing she should stay because she currently is the best option.


Tue, but is there anyone to replace her? or even can? she cannot stay forever, they do need to try and build new leaders. new leaders who represent Germany now, Not just Merkil.

She may be best option but she also has immense baggage is taking its toll, the right is rising under her leadership higher than ever before, there almost second or third in German parliament, they not been higher since start of republic, and elements across the entire of more left leaning Europe. the longer shee stays in power, how much higher will they go, or even take Parliment majority.

Right nearly took Austrias president at one point, France was seeing a powerful Le pen.

Her history, and reputation she leave smay be better if she does bow out rather than be pushed or lose.


Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.

"May the odds be ever in your favour"

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.

FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.  
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





Just to add one point quickly, as some of the post showed up while I was writing my reply:

many of posters here fall in one simple trap - up untill very recently majority of ruling parties in EU countries were basically the same large faction. This translated to something of a "net" of power, concentrating on Merkel personally. Think of it as a local "supporting states" all over europe, so we tended to see single persons as "major players". UKiP and AfD might be small parties within their respective countries, but every EU country has similiar parties on the rise for a some time now. By very nature of those parties, they are divided, so there is no "net of international supporters" behind any single person representing such "alternative" view on EU, but in overall picture it is a significant voice all over Europe. So it is better to not focus on single individuals, but look at the reasons why people vote for such movements and if anything have been done to change the state of things behind those reasons. IMHO nothing EU did in the last 5 years changed anything that could hold that trend.
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





 jhe90 wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:
 jhe90 wrote:
Yeah, she has been inpower a very long time, has aot of baggage but also knows Europe very well too.

Id say she should however choose a time to bow out gracefully than cling on to power by her fingernails. Every poetical career comes to a end at some point, unless your basically a dictator.

She might be the 'best' leader in Europe/the EU atm going off experience and ability, which is valuable in itself. It gives a bit of stability to Germany as well.

IDK if or when she would choose to bow out of politics. While she appears as a grey, boring person she seems to have a strong sense of duty to Germany and what she believes is best for Germany. In part that could cloud her vision to a possible successors, but she might have a point n believing she should stay because she currently is the best option.


Tue, but is there anyone to replace her? or even can? she cannot stay forever, they do need to try and build new leaders. new leaders who represent Germany now, Not just Merkil.

She may be best option but she also has immense baggage is taking its toll, the right is rising under her leadership higher than ever before, there almost second or third in German parliament, they not been higher since start of republic, and elements across the entire of more left leaning Europe. the longer shee stays in power, how much higher will they go, or even take Parliment majority.

Right nearly took Austrias president at one point, France was seeing a powerful Le pen.

Her history, and reputation she leave smay be better if she does bow out rather than be pushed or lose.


A few things, I don't believe she is grooming a successor as she didn't/doesn't believe it is necessary yet. But she would pick the successor with her party based on electoral result, its unlikely the CDU/CSU will be dethroned quickly. So it will likely be someone quite similar to her.

The AfD is the third party, but third isn't that significant as the three smallest parties are only slightly smaller than the AfD. I wouldn't expect a more significant rise in the far right wing however, as this really was there moment. There are limits to how far an organization like the AfD can get, keeping in mind that the CDU/CSU is already pretty right themselves in many issues. The far-right will have its limits. Expecting a parliamentary majority in the near future is extremely unlikely seeing as what the AfD represents to most Germans.

Taking into account that Austria has never really faced up to its far right and Nazi past the public faux pas is not as pervasive there. The Le Pens have had two shots now and were defeated. A argument is to be made that this moment too represented the best conditions for Le Pen and she lost. While I'm not going to claim with a 100% certainty that its never going to happen, I think that 2017 represented somewhat of a high water mark for the far right in Europe based on circumstances outside their power. I can always be wrong however, just my view.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
nou wrote:
Just to add one point quickly, as some of the post showed up while I was writing my reply:

many of posters here fall in one simple trap - up untill very recently majority of ruling parties in EU countries were basically the same large faction. This translated to something of a "net" of power, concentrating on Merkel personally. Think of it as a local "supporting states" all over europe, so we tended to see single persons as "major players". UKiP and AfD might be small parties within their respective countries, but every EU country has similiar parties on the rise for a some time now. By very nature of those parties, they are divided, so there is no "net of international supporters" behind any single person representing such "alternative" view on EU, but in overall picture it is a significant voice all over Europe. So it is better to not focus on single individuals, but look at the reasons why people vote for such movements and if anything have been done to change the state of things behind those reasons. IMHO nothing EU did in the last 5 years changed anything that could hold that trend.

Problem for most of those parties is that they also contain significant far right/populist sentiments that can only carry them so far and are inherently divisive. They are reactionary/protests politics. They have been doing (marginally) well since the 2000's. And the EU can do very little against these parties mainly because their main focus is on domestic politics. Defeating Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD will never be through the efforts of the EU as the EU is just a side project to them. Their main focus is fighting for the nationalistic socio-cultural issues.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/04 14:55:18


Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Problem for most of those parties is that they also contain significant far right/populist sentiments that can only carry them so far and are inherently divisive. They are reactionary/protests politics. They have been doing (marginally) well since the 2000's. And the EU can do very little against these parties mainly because their main focus is on domestic politics. Defeating Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD will never be through the efforts of the EU as the EU is just a side project to them. Their main focus is fighting for the nationalistic socio-cultural issues.


Let me reiterate, as you missed the point I was making and answered in a completely unrelated direction. Don't focus at parties, don't focus on "big names", focus on voters instead. Those are real people with their personalities, fears, worries, needs and views. Word "populists" is pretty much as devalued as "nazi" and "democracy" nowadays, with "populists" meaning pretty much the same as "other side of the political fence, which doesn't uphold 'our' or 'mainstream' view". Calling those voters "susceptible to populism" is not going to change that Brexit happened because of such neglected voters, Trump happened because such neglected voters, Orban happened because of such neglected voters and Le Pen nearly happened, Hofer nearly happened. In Poland, last presidential elections have turned from "pretty boring, 99% sure reelection with >60% voters backing reelection" to complete turnout of both presidential and parliamentary power by rise of fresh 10% "third party" during electorial period, exactly because pro EU Tusk's, which is now so called president of EU, actively neglected and marginalised nearly 40% of voters. And major west countries are now going down exactly the same road. Uncontent voters don't simply "go away" when you close your eyes and call them populists. What is "enlightened" and what is "populist" doesn't really matter in true democracies unless those "enlightened" view trully makes people's lives better in a way that is felt by them and can be "sold" during campaigns. Sadly, this is how world works. And in the last 5 years EU hasn't address anything, that pushes those voters into "populists fandom".

One more thing - pretty much noone in this thread has any real knowledge on how eastern and central EU members change the EU landscape after Brexit. You do realise, that after Brexit it is Weimar Triangle relations that define what will happen next?
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

^^ The above is correct except that it isn't the EU's role to address the concerns of "populist neglected voters" it is the role of the individual countries' governments to do so.

To get back to the main topic.. Merkel of course will go away eventually, because (to quote Voltaire, "All things fall") and also because at some point she probably will want to retire and live on her farm or whatever.

However I do not think that time is yet. For one thing, there are no very good contenders at the moment.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 Kilkrazy wrote:
^^ The above is correct except that it isn't the EU's role to address the concerns of "populist neglected voters" it is the role of the individual countries' governments to do so.

To get back to the main topic.. Merkel of course will go away eventually, because (to quote Voltaire, "All things fall") and also because at some point she probably will want to retire and live on her farm or whatever.

However I do not think that time is yet. For one thing, there are no very good contenders at the moment.


Not when huge amount of new laws in "new" or "poorer" EU countries during last decade have been introduced because EU demands standarisation and unification or straigt up "colony style" governing, even if it's against particular country interests. We had a few of large cases of such behavior in EU in the last decade, Greece's Syriza failure case being the biggest one.

And this is all "on topic", because, as I tried to point out, German inner politics isn't really inner to Germany. It is based on Germany role within EU and Merkel's ability to enforce German POV within EU. And this power is diminishing steadily for at least couple of years now. This is the mayor reason why coalition talks are prolonging. Looking just at German politics cannot give satisfactory answers to why there is no govermnent formed already. With just migration problem alone, German central government cannot satisfy some of Land-states that are opposing Merkel politics, because EU relocation politic was an utter failure. You simply cannot separate EU politics from any single EU country inner politics anymore.

"Having no good contenders" isn't realy any arguement as even recent history has shown, that such contenders repeatedly emerge in last moments and destabilise even such well established countries as Britain or US. At this moment only Germany Lands Federation structure is what is holding this stale from having greater destabilising influence on Germany situation. But inability to form a goverment lands on Merkels account, not opposition or coalition. Historically speaking, Germans always wanted and backed strong leaders. Last couple of years shows, that Merkel is no longer a strong leader. As soon as a "good enough" contender emerges, she's out. Schultzes position pretty much hinges right now on his "pet project" of 7th article vote against Poland (again, EU politics meaning a lot to inner German politics). If this vote fails he shows pretty much how weak he, his wing in EU and Germany are right now...
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





nou wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Problem for most of those parties is that they also contain significant far right/populist sentiments that can only carry them so far and are inherently divisive. They are reactionary/protests politics. They have been doing (marginally) well since the 2000's. And the EU can do very little against these parties mainly because their main focus is on domestic politics. Defeating Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD will never be through the efforts of the EU as the EU is just a side project to them. Their main focus is fighting for the nationalistic socio-cultural issues.


Let me reiterate, as you missed the point I was making and answered in a completely unrelated direction. Don't focus at parties, don't focus on "big names", focus on voters instead. Those are real people with their personalities, fears, worries, needs and views. Word "populists" is pretty much as devalued as "nazi" and "democracy" nowadays, with "populists" meaning pretty much the same as "other side of the political fence, which doesn't uphold 'our' or 'mainstream' view". Calling those voters "susceptible to populism" is not going to change that Brexit happened because of such neglected voters, Trump happened because such neglected voters, Orban happened because of such neglected voters and Le Pen nearly happened, Hofer nearly happened. In Poland, last presidential elections have turned from "pretty boring, 99% sure reelection with >60% voters backing reelection" to complete turnout of both presidential and parliamentary power by rise of fresh 10% "third party" during electorial period, exactly because pro EU Tusk's, which is now so called president of EU, actively neglected and marginalised nearly 40% of voters. And major west countries are now going down exactly the same road. Uncontent voters don't simply "go away" when you close your eyes and call them populists. What is "enlightened" and what is "populist" doesn't really matter in true democracies unless those "enlightened" view trully makes people's lives better in a way that is felt by them and can be "sold" during campaigns. Sadly, this is how world works. And in the last 5 years EU hasn't address anything, that pushes those voters into "populists fandom".

One more thing - pretty much noone in this thread has any real knowledge on how eastern and central EU members change the EU landscape after Brexit. You do realise, that after Brexit it is Weimar Triangle relations that define what will happen next?

I didn't miss the point, I was explaining that the parties these people vote for are populist/right wing parties that aren't really focused on the EU. As I said earlier, people voting for these parties are mainly doing so out of protest and not necessarily genuine belief as many of these parties have very incoherent platforms. As such people not happy with the EU have no one to vote for, as even Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD grudgingly put up with the EU or are whishy washy when it comes to a Nexit, Frexit or Dexit because they see its not popular enough. They keep backtracking and reforming their stances on the EU on a continuous basis because they are populist (its expected Le Pen is abandoning leaving the EU as a campaign platform after her loss).

I'm not accusing voters of falling pray to populism, on the contrary, populism is used to draw in everyone as a protest vote. Most of them are sensible enough to recognize that the AfD, Wilders or Le Pen have no real platform that would work in an economical or even legal sense. But things such as Trump voters just prove that people do it in protest, sticking up the middle finger to the 'establishment', but there is some lack of recognition that those policies are unworkable. Yet people like Le Pen and Wilders are the establishment, they are relatively wealthy people with long long careers in politics.

The problem is that our 'mainstream' parties don't give people a correct outlet. But my point was that neither do the populist/far right parties. They scream what sounds nice because it will attract everyone sick of the 'mainstream' in a kind of "that will show them". But in the end they won't offer the solution to those people either. On the EU these parties aren't better than others, the Front National already admitted there will be no Frexit and neither the AfD or Wilders would get the popular support (the AfD isn't even clearly pro Dexit). So yes, focus on the voters, but then what? In Western Europe these voters don't have real options and these populist parties willingly obfuscate their true viewpoints to get votes.

I'm not calling the voters populists, that would be strange as a populist is essentially just a type of politician, not really a run of the mill voter. Also being a 'populist' and 'enlightened' isn't necessarily a dichotomy, it just depends on what kind of brand of populism you're espousing. But the brand of populism in Europe is focused on fear and 'culture wars', which isn't very enlightened imo. Yet you missed my key point, namely that the EU can do very little on this front, as its mainly focused on domestic politics and not EU politics.

I wouldn't accuse others of having no knowledge of how the landscape is going to change. True Poland is gaining in importance, but Poland and the UK were frequently in the same corner interest and alliance wise. So some things change and others stay the same. Poland loses some with Brexit but might regain elsewhere as the prominent Eastern European EU leader. Its also going to be interesting how the EP is going to be redivided based on Brexit. But I wouldn't just say that the Weimar Triangle will now be the decider from now on. There are still significant power blocks that don't necessarily have to include Poland. It all depends on how Poland plays its hand.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/01/04 16:32:39


Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in us
Never Forget Isstvan!





Chicago

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
But you hit the nail on the head though, the AfD already controlled the narrative and this is what they managed in voter shares in a country with an electoral system miles easier to succeed in than the UK. 12% is what they got in the absolute 'best' circumstances with a large amount of refugees in the 2013-2017 years and the belief in a populist spring. Unless all of Syria decides to come over now, how will the AfD top that beneficial PR (to them) these past years?

Plus UKIP had a much much easier opponent to flog votes with the EU. While the AfD has to depend on the nebelous concept of immigration that is significantly down compared to a few years ago. While UKIP could combine immigration, sovereignity and economic issues in a dark EU 'cloud' so to speak, the AfD can't. Immigration is pretty much single issue and they got their popularity from the immigration 'wave'. But that wave is over and the issue will be slowly pushed back while other issues come forward. Plus the EU would be an omnipresent issue for UKIP to bang on about if remain had won, but with decent policies immigration/integration doesn't have to be a permanent issue.

Plus you have to take into account the media enviroment which is completely different as well as the public opinion. Immigration isn't nearly as divisive in Germany as the EU is in the UK. Sure its big, but not approaching an almost 50-50 split big. Furthermore while Farage lies a lot and is in general a less than pleasent person, he isn't nearly as bad as the public faces of the AfD. Some of whom include the guy who thinks Germany should be proud of their massive war crime comitting Wehrmacht past.

The AfD isn't comparable to UKIP but more the Front National and Wilders. Both around for years if not decades with success going up and down, but always just out of reach of true coherent platforms and power due to the pervasive stink around them for most voters. Yeah they might be annoying to have around for other parties, but it shows you can live with them without them getting too much in the way so to speak.

On the note of their being nobody else, there are, just none who manage to pull in 1/3 of the popular vote. Merkel is still the most popular candidate by far even though Schultz was seemingly a serious contender for a while. If Merkel gets in for another four years its because that's what the voters wanted, they had other options to vote for, she is the best choice for the CDU/CSU and still pretty popular by most proportional representation democracies standards. Our PM isn't nearly as popular as Merkel is for example in voter share.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and btw your poll might end up badly representing off topic due to how the poll is phrased and the title is, as people answering no based on the title would have to say yes based on the poll question. Mistakes are likely to be made in that.


You are correct on the last part, I voted no meaning that her time isn't up

Fake news poll

Ustrello paints- 30k, 40k multiple armies
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/614742.page 
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





nou wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
^^ The above is correct except that it isn't the EU's role to address the concerns of "populist neglected voters" it is the role of the individual countries' governments to do so.

To get back to the main topic.. Merkel of course will go away eventually, because (to quote Voltaire, "All things fall") and also because at some point she probably will want to retire and live on her farm or whatever.

However I do not think that time is yet. For one thing, there are no very good contenders at the moment.


Not when huge amount of new laws in "new" or "poorer" EU countries during last decade have been introduced because EU demands standarisation and unification or straigt up "colony style" governing, even if it's against particular country interests. We had a few of large cases of such behavior in EU in the last decade, Greece's Syriza failure case being the biggest one.

And this is all "on topic", because, as I tried to point out, German inner politics isn't really inner to Germany. It is based on Germany role within EU and Merkel's ability to enforce German POV within EU. And this power is diminishing steadily for at least couple of years now. This is the mayor reason why coalition talks are prolonging. Looking just at German politics cannot give satisfactory answers to why there is no govermnent formed already. With just migration problem alone, German central government cannot satisfy some of Land-states that are opposing Merkel politics, because EU relocation politic was an utter failure. You simply cannot separate EU politics from any single EU country inner politics anymore.

"Having no good contenders" isn't realy any arguement as even recent history has shown, that such contenders repeatedly emerge in last moments and destabilise even such well established countries as Britain or US. At this moment only Germany Lands Federation structure is what is holding this stale from having greater destabilising influence on Germany situation. But inability to form a goverment lands on Merkels account, not opposition or coalition. Historically speaking, Germans always wanted and backed strong leaders. Last couple of years shows, that Merkel is no longer a strong leader. As soon as a "good enough" contender emerges, she's out. Schultzes position pretty much hinges right now on his "pet project" of 7th article vote against Poland (again, EU politics meaning a lot to inner German politics). If this vote fails he shows pretty much how weak he, his wing in EU and Germany are right now...

Well standardisation and unification make sense seeing as how its supposed to be a single market. Significant flaws in implementation aside the EU could only function as a political entity if you take out that chunk of importance to the single market. Greece is a very divisive case however, seeing as that both the EU and Greece share a portion of the blame.

I'm curious, why do you think German power in the EU is declining? Also the reason coalition talks are prolonging is not the EU, the Jamaica coalition failed because of other policy differences. Now between the SPD and CDU/CSU it will be a significant bone of contention, yet they already governed together the past four years. The EU is important in talks, but not the critical issue at the moment. Also yes the EU relocation policy failed, but in part because some countries absolutely refused to participate in helping refugees. In the end Merkel thought she did what was best, and really there weren't many options to stop the refugees from coming to Europe, forcing them out would be abominable.

Actually recent history shows that those contenders really aren't good contenders because they are in it for themselves. Nothing done so far has helped alleviate the problems facing the 'regular guy' (hell the only US 'succes' was the tax reform). They aren't good contenders exactly because they are populists, they lie and change positions so often that they have no coherent policies to actually help and show no interest to do so once they have succeeded.

Yes, if Merkel can't form a government it is on her. Yet there isn't really anyone in the wings to replace her yet, so if it came to another election she would likely be running and win again, getting stuck in the same mess. Another Merkel government is realistically and electorally seemingly the only way forward. She would be out after the next term in that situation. Also historically wanted and backed strong leaders? There are only a few German chancellors after 1945 that I would term as 'strong', its hardly "historical" if we exclude Bismarck and Hitler (and then "backed" is a seriously lacking term for how they acquired power).

Schultz already emerged as a contender for a while in the run up to the elections before going down, it won't hinge on Article 7, as its doomed to fail on account of Hungary anyway. So when the Article 7 vote fails it won't be seen as weakness, everyone knew it would anyone. The Article 7 vote was called as a signal to Poland, a fully symbolic move.

Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 Disciple of Fate wrote:
nou wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Problem for most of those parties is that they also contain significant far right/populist sentiments that can only carry them so far and are inherently divisive. They are reactionary/protests politics. They have been doing (marginally) well since the 2000's. And the EU can do very little against these parties mainly because their main focus is on domestic politics. Defeating Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD will never be through the efforts of the EU as the EU is just a side project to them. Their main focus is fighting for the nationalistic socio-cultural issues.


Let me reiterate, as you missed the point I was making and answered in a completely unrelated direction. Don't focus at parties, don't focus on "big names", focus on voters instead. Those are real people with their personalities, fears, worries, needs and views. Word "populists" is pretty much as devalued as "nazi" and "democracy" nowadays, with "populists" meaning pretty much the same as "other side of the political fence, which doesn't uphold 'our' or 'mainstream' view". Calling those voters "susceptible to populism" is not going to change that Brexit happened because of such neglected voters, Trump happened because such neglected voters, Orban happened because of such neglected voters and Le Pen nearly happened, Hofer nearly happened. In Poland, last presidential elections have turned from "pretty boring, 99% sure reelection with >60% voters backing reelection" to complete turnout of both presidential and parliamentary power by rise of fresh 10% "third party" during electorial period, exactly because pro EU Tusk's, which is now so called president of EU, actively neglected and marginalised nearly 40% of voters. And major west countries are now going down exactly the same road. Uncontent voters don't simply "go away" when you close your eyes and call them populists. What is "enlightened" and what is "populist" doesn't really matter in true democracies unless those "enlightened" view trully makes people's lives better in a way that is felt by them and can be "sold" during campaigns. Sadly, this is how world works. And in the last 5 years EU hasn't address anything, that pushes those voters into "populists fandom".

One more thing - pretty much noone in this thread has any real knowledge on how eastern and central EU members change the EU landscape after Brexit. You do realise, that after Brexit it is Weimar Triangle relations that define what will happen next?

I didn't miss the point, I was explaining that the parties these people vote for are populist/right wing parties that aren't really focused on the EU. As I said earlier, people voting for these parties are mainly doing so out of protest and not necessarily genuine belief as many of these parties have very incoherent platforms. As such people not happy with the EU have no one to vote for, as even Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD grudgingly put up with the EU or are whishy washy when it comes to a Nexit, Frexit or Dexit because they see its not popular enough. They keep backtracking and reforming their stances on the EU on a continuous basis because they are populist (its expected Le Pen is abandoning leaving the EU as a campaign platform after her loss).

I'm not accusing voters of falling pray to populism, on the contrary, populism is used to draw in everyone as a protest vote. Most of them are sensible enough to recognize that the AfD, Wilders or Le Pen have no real platform that would work in an economical or even legal sense. But things such as Trump voters just prove that people do it in protest, sticking up the middle finger to the 'establishment', but the lack of recognition that those policies are unworkable. Yet people like Le Pen and Wilders are the establishment, they are relatively wealthy people with long long careers in politics.

The problem is that our 'mainstream' parties don't give people a correct outlet. But my point was that neither do the populist/far right parties. They scream what sounds nice because it will attract everyone sick of the 'mainstream' in a kind of "that will show them". But in the end they won't offer the solution to those people either. On the EU these parties aren't better than others, the Front National already admitted there will be no Frexit and neither the AfD or Wilders wouldn't get the popular support. So yes, focus on the voters, but then what? In Western Europe these voters don't have real options and these populist parties willingly obfuscate their true viewpoints to get votes.

I'm not calling the voters populists, that would be strange as a populist is essentially just a type of politician, not really a run of the mill voter. Also being a 'populist' and 'enlightened' isn't necessarily a dichotomy, it just depends on what kind of brand of populism you're espousing. But the brand of populism in Europe is focused on fear and 'culture wars', which isn't very enlightened imo. Yet you missed my key point, namely that the EU can do very little on this front, as its mainly focused on domestic politics and not EU politics.


I have probably addressed some of our missunderstandings in my post to Killkrazy while you were writing yours... Answering directly - "But things such as Trump voters just prove that people do it in protest, sticking up the middle finger to the 'establishment', but the lack of recognition that those policies are unworkable." isn't true. Trump won, because US establishment neglected huge part of population, focusing only on "big cities problems" and mainstream narration blaming a lot of social issues on mythical "opressive white man", while in reality, most white men in the US were in a grip of the same structural problems other social groups are having. And Trump election is saying "enough is enough" by true population majority that have been blamed for everything. That is some serious fault of Obama's presidency to allow such blaming to grow. And such situations are repeating in the EU, just on different grounds. All your posts are very west-centric. But what is really going on within EU is brewing pretty much in central and eastern Europe. We had a long lasting war in Ukraine, just "right next door", and pretty much no western mainstream media used a word "war" for it. For eastern block countries Russian agression is not an imaginary possibility, but real fear, much stronger than migration problems. Did you knew, that Poland gave more than 1mln of Ukrainians work visas but is now being threaten by Schultz about not taking in Afrikan work migration in just because west prefers to call Marocans, Algerians and other migrants "war refugees"? Or that Nord Stream 2 and "gas wars/unified european energetic policy" are center of political focus for central european countries and voters in those countries? Our current governing party is being called populist and even fascist by pretty much all left-wing media in EU, despite it being pretty much as centric as previous governing party, it is just not pro-Germany (but is pro-EU, despite all being said about them). West-East tensions in EU have never been so strong as they are after Brexit. If last elections in Poland had different results, UE relocation treaty would pass, because our last government did everything Mekel wanted them to do (this is why Tusk is now president of EU) and Merkel would have a lot easier time creating her goverment right now.

It is not "local goverment duty" to manage clusterfeths and unrests that are made on highest levels of EU or Germany governments and influence everyone in Europe. We are too strongly interconnected to treat Farage, Le Pen, Orban or Kaczyński merely as "local aberrations". But a lot of "big names" on european scene still thinks, that they can "rule", not "govern"...
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 Disciple of Fate wrote:
nou wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
^^ The above is correct except that it isn't the EU's role to address the concerns of "populist neglected voters" it is the role of the individual countries' governments to do so.

To get back to the main topic.. Merkel of course will go away eventually, because (to quote Voltaire, "All things fall") and also because at some point she probably will want to retire and live on her farm or whatever.

However I do not think that time is yet. For one thing, there are no very good contenders at the moment.


Not when huge amount of new laws in "new" or "poorer" EU countries during last decade have been introduced because EU demands standarisation and unification or straigt up "colony style" governing, even if it's against particular country interests. We had a few of large cases of such behavior in EU in the last decade, Greece's Syriza failure case being the biggest one.

And this is all "on topic", because, as I tried to point out, German inner politics isn't really inner to Germany. It is based on Germany role within EU and Merkel's ability to enforce German POV within EU. And this power is diminishing steadily for at least couple of years now. This is the mayor reason why coalition talks are prolonging. Looking just at German politics cannot give satisfactory answers to why there is no govermnent formed already. With just migration problem alone, German central government cannot satisfy some of Land-states that are opposing Merkel politics, because EU relocation politic was an utter failure. You simply cannot separate EU politics from any single EU country inner politics anymore.

"Having no good contenders" isn't realy any arguement as even recent history has shown, that such contenders repeatedly emerge in last moments and destabilise even such well established countries as Britain or US. At this moment only Germany Lands Federation structure is what is holding this stale from having greater destabilising influence on Germany situation. But inability to form a goverment lands on Merkels account, not opposition or coalition. Historically speaking, Germans always wanted and backed strong leaders. Last couple of years shows, that Merkel is no longer a strong leader. As soon as a "good enough" contender emerges, she's out. Schultzes position pretty much hinges right now on his "pet project" of 7th article vote against Poland (again, EU politics meaning a lot to inner German politics). If this vote fails he shows pretty much how weak he, his wing in EU and Germany are right now...

Well standardisation and unification make sense seeing as how its supposed to be a single market. Significant flaws in implementation aside the EU could only function as a political entity if you take out that chunk of importance to the single market. Greece is a very divisive case however, seeing as that both the EU and Greece share a portion of the blame.

I'm curious, why do you think German power in the EU is declining? Also the reason coalition talks are prolonging is not the EU, the Jamaica coalition failed because of other policy differences. Now between the SPD and CDU/CSU it will be a significant bone of contention, yet they already governed together the past four years. The EU is important in talks, but not the critical issue at the moment. Also yes the EU relocation policy failed, but in part because some countries absolutely refused to participate in helping refugees. In the end Merkel thought she did what was best, and really there weren't many options to stop the refugees from coming to Europe, forcing them out would be abominable.

Actually recent history shows that those contenders really aren't good contenders because they are in it for themselves. Nothing done so far has helped alleviate the problems facing the 'regular guy' (hell the only US 'succes' was the tax reform). They aren't good contenders exactly because they are populists, they lie and change positions so often that they have no coherent policies to actually help and show no interest to do so once they have succeeded.

Yes, if Merkel can't form a government it is on her. Yet there isn't really anyone in the wings to replace her yet, so if it came to another election she would likely be running and win again, getting stuck in the same mess. Another Merkel government is realistically and electorally seemingly the only way forward. She would be out after the next term in that situation. Also historically wanted and backed strong leaders? There are only a few German chancellors after 1945 that I would term as 'strong', its hardly "historical" if we exclude Bismarck and Hitler (and then "backed" is a seriously lacking term for how they acquired power).

Schultz already emerged as a contender for a while in the run up to the elections before going down, it won't hinge on Article 7, as its doomed to fail on account of Hungary anyway. So when the Article 7 vote fails it won't be seen as weakness, everyone knew it would anyone. The Article 7 vote was called as a signal to Poland, a fully symbolic move.


Why Germany power is declining? Have you heard about Chinese bailing out Deutche Bank and how German export subsidising works? I have already answered why Poland didn't took any "refugees" in (but is significantly helping "on site", which have been praised even by Syrian based institutions). Article 7 failure is yet another show of lack of real EU power to actually come to consensus. It started with Orban a long time ago, even then, against a much smaller country EU showed that it is structurally inefficient in actual governing. Numbers from relocation program, even within participating countries showed by Frontex and Eurostat are pretty much sign admition, that this problem has never been adressed in any rational or functional form. You might want to read into this artice from Le Figaro http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/monde/2017/12/21/31002-20171221ARTFIG00266-l-injustice-faite-a-la-pologne-un-deni-de-democratie.php to see why there is factual "Europe of two speeds" or more precisely "two standards" and why Eastern and Central european countries won't accept German and French "hegemony" for much longer. Up untill two years ago, Germany had pretty much a 30mln worth of liegeman in form of Polish government, but now it has 30mln of competition. What you wrote about standarisation of EU laws shows how little you actually know about "minutiae" of eastern accession to EU structures. One example - French and Germany shipyards were government backed at the very same time Polish shipyards were closed because "illegal state backing". If you won't dig deeper into last 25 years of history of Eastern Europe you're pretty much doomed to fail understanding why Central and Eastern European countries don't exactly "love" Germany or EU in it's current form.
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





nou wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:
nou wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Problem for most of those parties is that they also contain significant far right/populist sentiments that can only carry them so far and are inherently divisive. They are reactionary/protests politics. They have been doing (marginally) well since the 2000's. And the EU can do very little against these parties mainly because their main focus is on domestic politics. Defeating Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD will never be through the efforts of the EU as the EU is just a side project to them. Their main focus is fighting for the nationalistic socio-cultural issues.


Let me reiterate, as you missed the point I was making and answered in a completely unrelated direction. Don't focus at parties, don't focus on "big names", focus on voters instead. Those are real people with their personalities, fears, worries, needs and views. Word "populists" is pretty much as devalued as "nazi" and "democracy" nowadays, with "populists" meaning pretty much the same as "other side of the political fence, which doesn't uphold 'our' or 'mainstream' view". Calling those voters "susceptible to populism" is not going to change that Brexit happened because of such neglected voters, Trump happened because such neglected voters, Orban happened because of such neglected voters and Le Pen nearly happened, Hofer nearly happened. In Poland, last presidential elections have turned from "pretty boring, 99% sure reelection with >60% voters backing reelection" to complete turnout of both presidential and parliamentary power by rise of fresh 10% "third party" during electorial period, exactly because pro EU Tusk's, which is now so called president of EU, actively neglected and marginalised nearly 40% of voters. And major west countries are now going down exactly the same road. Uncontent voters don't simply "go away" when you close your eyes and call them populists. What is "enlightened" and what is "populist" doesn't really matter in true democracies unless those "enlightened" view trully makes people's lives better in a way that is felt by them and can be "sold" during campaigns. Sadly, this is how world works. And in the last 5 years EU hasn't address anything, that pushes those voters into "populists fandom".

One more thing - pretty much noone in this thread has any real knowledge on how eastern and central EU members change the EU landscape after Brexit. You do realise, that after Brexit it is Weimar Triangle relations that define what will happen next?

I didn't miss the point, I was explaining that the parties these people vote for are populist/right wing parties that aren't really focused on the EU. As I said earlier, people voting for these parties are mainly doing so out of protest and not necessarily genuine belief as many of these parties have very incoherent platforms. As such people not happy with the EU have no one to vote for, as even Le Pen, Wilders and the AfD grudgingly put up with the EU or are whishy washy when it comes to a Nexit, Frexit or Dexit because they see its not popular enough. They keep backtracking and reforming their stances on the EU on a continuous basis because they are populist (its expected Le Pen is abandoning leaving the EU as a campaign platform after her loss).

I'm not accusing voters of falling pray to populism, on the contrary, populism is used to draw in everyone as a protest vote. Most of them are sensible enough to recognize that the AfD, Wilders or Le Pen have no real platform that would work in an economical or even legal sense. But things such as Trump voters just prove that people do it in protest, sticking up the middle finger to the 'establishment', but the lack of recognition that those policies are unworkable. Yet people like Le Pen and Wilders are the establishment, they are relatively wealthy people with long long careers in politics.

The problem is that our 'mainstream' parties don't give people a correct outlet. But my point was that neither do the populist/far right parties. They scream what sounds nice because it will attract everyone sick of the 'mainstream' in a kind of "that will show them". But in the end they won't offer the solution to those people either. On the EU these parties aren't better than others, the Front National already admitted there will be no Frexit and neither the AfD or Wilders wouldn't get the popular support. So yes, focus on the voters, but then what? In Western Europe these voters don't have real options and these populist parties willingly obfuscate their true viewpoints to get votes.

I'm not calling the voters populists, that would be strange as a populist is essentially just a type of politician, not really a run of the mill voter. Also being a 'populist' and 'enlightened' isn't necessarily a dichotomy, it just depends on what kind of brand of populism you're espousing. But the brand of populism in Europe is focused on fear and 'culture wars', which isn't very enlightened imo. Yet you missed my key point, namely that the EU can do very little on this front, as its mainly focused on domestic politics and not EU politics.


I have probably addressed some of our missunderstandings in my post to Killkrazy while you were writing yours... Answering directly - "But things such as Trump voters just prove that people do it in protest, sticking up the middle finger to the 'establishment', but the lack of recognition that those policies are unworkable." isn't true. Trump won, because US establishment neglected huge part of population, focusing only on "big cities problems" and mainstream narration blaming a lot of social issues on mythical "opressive white man", while in reality, most white men in the US were in a grip of the same structural problems other social groups are having. And Trump election is saying "enough is enough" by true population majority that have been blamed for everything. That is some serious fault of Obama's presidency to allow such blaming to grow.

This is the last I'm going to write on this as its getting dangerously off topic. It is true. Saying you recognize their problems is one thing, acting is another. Trump so far has done nothing to help his base with the tax reform and his efforts to repeal the ACA are actively harmful to his base. You nailed my previous point about the nationalistic/culture war though as that is fully what you focused on, instead of the lack of solutions for his base this past year.

Its a protest vote for someone with no workable policies.

nou wrote:
And such situations are repeating in the EU, just on different grounds. All your posts are very west-centric. But what is really going on within EU is brewing pretty much in central and eastern Europe. We had a long lasting war in Ukraine, just "right next door", and pretty much no western mainstream media used a word "war" for it. For eastern block countries Russian agression is not an imaginary possibility, but real fear, much stronger than migration problems. Did you knew, that Poland gave more than 1mln of Ukrainians work visas but is now being threaten by Schultz about not taking in Afrikan work migration in just because west prefers to call Marocans, Algerians and other migrants "war refugees"? Or that Nord Stream 2 and "gas wars/unified european energetic policy" are center of political focus for central european countries and voters in those countries? Our current governing party is being called populist and even fascist by pretty much all left-wing media in EU, despite it being pretty much as centric as previous governing party, it is just not pro-Germany (but is pro-EU, despite all being said about them). West-East tensions in EU have never been so strong as they are after Brexit. If last elections in Poland had different results, UE relocation treaty would pass, because our last government did everything Mekel wanted them to do (this is why Tusk is now president of EU) and Merkel would have a lot easier time creating her goverment right now.

It is not "local goverment duty" to manage clusterfeths and unrests that are made on highest levels of EU or Germany governments and influence everyone in Europe. We are too strongly interconnected to treat Farage, Le Pen, Orban or Kaczyński merely as "local aberrations". But a lot of "big names" on european scene still thinks, that they can "rule", not "govern"...

Its "Western-centric" because this is a topic about Germany, mainly considered a Western European country in politics and outlook. So comparing it to Western European countries provides the closest comparison.

Bringing up Ukraine is of little value, because in 5 seconds of googling I can find US, UK, German and other Western European media referring to the war in Ukraine. For Western Europe, Russian aggression is not an imaginary possibility either. Yet the fact that we threat it with more distance doesn't mean its not threatening in the West. There is a reason more Western NATO troops have gone to the Baltics. The fact that those are few in number is more of an indictment towards defense spending than any lack of perceived threat.

Also why are you using air quotes for war refugees? A good deal of Eastern European countries is refusing to take in actual refugees which is shameful. What do they think is going on in Syria exactly? Yeah the EU is handling their dispersal clumsily, but at the end of the road the EU isn't some place where you can pick out the nice things and leave the others to deal with any negative parts. I'm aware of Nord Stream 2 as EU energy policy is incredibly fascinating combined with oil and natural gas reserves of immediate non-EU neighbours and their (in)ability to meet rising demand.

From what media report on Poland here the words used are 'right wing' and 'authoritarian tendencies'. It depends on where you look for news. I have heard both sides from Poles outside of Poland, but situations such as Hungary or Poland put the EU on edge for good reason. With luck Poland can be discussed and negotiated with of course, because the government itself while having certain tendencies isn't that special a case/outlier. Orbán is another can of worms though.

You ignore the part that people like Farage, Le Pen and Orban blame the EU for local problems while only wanting the benefits. A lot of issues facing disgruntled voters do and have to be fixed on a national level because the EU has no control over it.

Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in gb
Lord Commander in a Plush Chair





Beijing

I reckon she’s had her time, but there’s no one ready to replace her, so she will go on.
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





nou wrote:
 Disciple of Fate wrote:
nou wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
^^ The above is correct except that it isn't the EU's role to address the concerns of "populist neglected voters" it is the role of the individual countries' governments to do so.

To get back to the main topic.. Merkel of course will go away eventually, because (to quote Voltaire, "All things fall") and also because at some point she probably will want to retire and live on her farm or whatever.

However I do not think that time is yet. For one thing, there are no very good contenders at the moment.


Not when huge amount of new laws in "new" or "poorer" EU countries during last decade have been introduced because EU demands standarisation and unification or straigt up "colony style" governing, even if it's against particular country interests. We had a few of large cases of such behavior in EU in the last decade, Greece's Syriza failure case being the biggest one.

And this is all "on topic", because, as I tried to point out, German inner politics isn't really inner to Germany. It is based on Germany role within EU and Merkel's ability to enforce German POV within EU. And this power is diminishing steadily for at least couple of years now. This is the mayor reason why coalition talks are prolonging. Looking just at German politics cannot give satisfactory answers to why there is no govermnent formed already. With just migration problem alone, German central government cannot satisfy some of Land-states that are opposing Merkel politics, because EU relocation politic was an utter failure. You simply cannot separate EU politics from any single EU country inner politics anymore.

"Having no good contenders" isn't realy any arguement as even recent history has shown, that such contenders repeatedly emerge in last moments and destabilise even such well established countries as Britain or US. At this moment only Germany Lands Federation structure is what is holding this stale from having greater destabilising influence on Germany situation. But inability to form a goverment lands on Merkels account, not opposition or coalition. Historically speaking, Germans always wanted and backed strong leaders. Last couple of years shows, that Merkel is no longer a strong leader. As soon as a "good enough" contender emerges, she's out. Schultzes position pretty much hinges right now on his "pet project" of 7th article vote against Poland (again, EU politics meaning a lot to inner German politics). If this vote fails he shows pretty much how weak he, his wing in EU and Germany are right now...

Well standardisation and unification make sense seeing as how its supposed to be a single market. Significant flaws in implementation aside the EU could only function as a political entity if you take out that chunk of importance to the single market. Greece is a very divisive case however, seeing as that both the EU and Greece share a portion of the blame.

I'm curious, why do you think German power in the EU is declining? Also the reason coalition talks are prolonging is not the EU, the Jamaica coalition failed because of other policy differences. Now between the SPD and CDU/CSU it will be a significant bone of contention, yet they already governed together the past four years. The EU is important in talks, but not the critical issue at the moment. Also yes the EU relocation policy failed, but in part because some countries absolutely refused to participate in helping refugees. In the end Merkel thought she did what was best, and really there weren't many options to stop the refugees from coming to Europe, forcing them out would be abominable.

Actually recent history shows that those contenders really aren't good contenders because they are in it for themselves. Nothing done so far has helped alleviate the problems facing the 'regular guy' (hell the only US 'succes' was the tax reform). They aren't good contenders exactly because they are populists, they lie and change positions so often that they have no coherent policies to actually help and show no interest to do so once they have succeeded.

Yes, if Merkel can't form a government it is on her. Yet there isn't really anyone in the wings to replace her yet, so if it came to another election she would likely be running and win again, getting stuck in the same mess. Another Merkel government is realistically and electorally seemingly the only way forward. She would be out after the next term in that situation. Also historically wanted and backed strong leaders? There are only a few German chancellors after 1945 that I would term as 'strong', its hardly "historical" if we exclude Bismarck and Hitler (and then "backed" is a seriously lacking term for how they acquired power).

Schultz already emerged as a contender for a while in the run up to the elections before going down, it won't hinge on Article 7, as its doomed to fail on account of Hungary anyway. So when the Article 7 vote fails it won't be seen as weakness, everyone knew it would anyone. The Article 7 vote was called as a signal to Poland, a fully symbolic move.


Why Germany power is declining? Have you heard about Chinese bailing out Deutche Bank and how German export subsidising works? I have already answered why Poland didn't took any "refugees" in (but is significantly helping "on site", which have been praised even by Syrian based institutions). Article 7 failure is yet another show of lack of real EU power to actually come to consensus. It started with Orban a long time ago, even then, against a much smaller country EU showed that it is structurally inefficient in actual governing. Numbers from relocation program, even within participating countries showed by Frontex and Eurostat are pretty much sign admition, that this problem has never been adressed in any rational or functional form. You might want to read into this artice from Le Figaro http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/monde/2017/12/21/31002-20171221ARTFIG00266-l-injustice-faite-a-la-pologne-un-deni-de-democratie.php to see why there is factual "Europe of two speeds" or more precisely "two standards" and why Eastern and Central european countries won't accept German and French "hegemony" for much longer. Up untill two years ago, Germany had pretty much a 30mln worth of liegeman in form of Polish government, but now it has 30mln of competition. What you wrote about standarisation of EU laws shows how little you actually know about "minutiae" of eastern accession to EU structures. One example - French and Germany shipyards were government backed at the very same time Polish shipyards were closed because "illegal state backing". If you won't dig deeper into last 25 years of history of Eastern Europe you're pretty much doomed to fail understanding why Central and Eastern European countries don't exactly "love" Germany or EU in it's current form.

That has been going on a long time in regards to Germany however, its nothing new.

Article 7 is not a failure of EU power to come to a consensus. It shows the power a single member state wields in the form of an Orban veto. Either the EU does "colony style" governing as you said and enforce its will on Hungary or its "structurally inefficient" to do so, it can't be both. There is a limit to EU supranational power and that is not on the EU, the EU simply was never given that power in the first place. The refugee problem again is national governments blocking and trying to walk away from any shared responsibility.

That article is from Le Figaro, but its an opinion piece from someone with a clear agenda based on where he works. Its not meant to be an objective article. There is even a Europe of three speeds really, North-West, South and East. Yeah, the EU went too far too fast and now its trying to pick up the pieces. Also the 'minutiae'? I made a general statement that standardization is required for a single market while saying there are significant implementation flaws. How is that wrong exactly? What you mention seems like an obvious implementation flaw just like 'secret' differing product standards or dumping inside the EU. Just because I don't go into detail doesn't mean I don't know, what a rude assumption. The EU North-South divide is already significant let alone the West-East, there is barely any love out there for how Germany runs the EU. France puts up with it because its size means it can avoid 'Germany's' rules.

Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

There are a lot of good and well informed posts here, so thanks for that.

I don't that much about modern German politics, so it's always hand to get a new perspective.

Another round of talks begins for forming a new government:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42594246

So what happens if the talks collapse? Merkel resigns? Fresh elections? Minority government or limbo for another few months?

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





I think the way we think about political careers is fundamentally strange. If someone enters public life because they have list of things they want to make happen, and after x years some of those goals aren't yet obtained and still might be, why would they leave? Its taken for granted that most of us will work in more or less the same profession for decades, but people in public life are seen differently for some reason. Now, politics is brutal and people can have careers ended in a single bad election, that's just the nature of the game. But this idea that a career should end just because its gone on a long time... what a strange notion that is.

Not having a go a Do I Not Like That for posing that question, because its a genuine question people are asking, I'm just saying its actually a pretty weird idea, if you think about it.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 sebster wrote:
I think the way we think about political careers is fundamentally strange. If someone enters public life because they have list of things they want to make happen, and after x years some of those goals aren't yet obtained and still might be, why would they leave? Its taken for granted that most of us will work in more or less the same profession for decades, but people in public life are seen differently for some reason. Now, politics is brutal and people can have careers ended in a single bad election, that's just the nature of the game. But this idea that a career should end just because its gone on a long time... what a strange notion that is.

Not having a go a Do I Not Like That for posing that question, because its a genuine question people are asking, I'm just saying its actually a pretty weird idea, if you think about it.


It's a drum I bang often on the UK politics thread,

but the problem with Western leaders, not just Merkel, is that they have no vision beyond power for its own sake. They mostly come across as bank managers and PR men/women fretting over missing paperclips.

If you know your post-WW2 UK history, then you'll know that the Labour party launched a moral crusade to eradicate poverty, squalor, unemployment, bad housing etc etc

and they gave us the biggest house-building programme in British history, and our NHS, and transformed Britain forever more. No UK politician since then has come even close to that.

Returning to Germany, every time I read a thread about Germany in a newspaper, somebody is always banging on about the delays to the new Berlin airport or something, and I've been hearing that for 5 years.

Why is Germany, a prosperous 1st world nation, still struggling to build an airport? It's symptomatic of the malaise affecting the West...

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in nl
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
but the problem with Western leaders, not just Merkel, is that they have no vision beyond power for its own sake. They mostly come across as bank managers and PR men/women fretting over missing paperclips.

If you know your post-WW2 UK history, then you'll know that the Labour party launched a moral crusade to eradicate poverty, squalor, unemployment, bad housing etc etc

and they gave us the biggest house-building programme in British history, and our NHS, and transformed Britain forever more. No UK politician since then has come even close to that.

Returning to Germany, every time I read a thread about Germany in a newspaper, somebody is always banging on about the delays to the new Berlin airport or something, and I've been hearing that for 5 years.

Why is Germany, a prosperous 1st world nation, still struggling to build an airport? It's symptomatic of the malaise affecting the West...

I wouldn't say its the problem with Western leaders. If you look at most PM/Presidents it is clear they have a vision for what is best for the country. Merkel and Macron both demonstrate that to some point, Merkel especially is flexible to the desires of Germany such as personally being unclear on gay marriage in a party against it, but still allowing a vote. You could call it cynical, but it does demonstrate a level of awareness not always present.

Problem with your UK comparison is that most of those benefits of the past still exist today, so politicians are mostly left tinkering to try and better the system as opposed to reinventing the wheel. Sadly that tinkering is heavily dependent on government budget and party leanings. Of course some political issues are UK specific or are trying to implement sweeping reforms people perceive as negative instead of positive.

On the Berlin Brandenburg note, it happens. Its not symptomatic I would say, as BB has become iconic do to the unique nature of its mess. Most of it comes down to the contractors that were hired. Afterwards it became clear they didn't have the expertise, several went bankrupt and had to be replaced, there was corruption going on etc. All of that adds up to significant delays, especially if you have to go back and rework significant parts. And it doesn't just happen in the West, most of the world has seen expensive construction delays, even countries such as China that are pumping out projects like this. It happens to all from time to time, nothing worth reading into.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/08 11:30:50


Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP) 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

The UK has got a problem with London Airport's proposed third runway. Should it be at Heathrow, Gatwick or Stansted?

Also the HST2 route and expense, and the complaints over the cost of CrossRail, and so on.

These kind of big infrastructure projects are difficult to complete partly because western democracies are democratic and the "leader" isn't allowed to settle such issues by ukase.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





I think Germany is going to regret opening the floodgates to refugees in the future and history might look back at her in a negative light. I don't really follow her, so I am not sure on all the 'good' she might have done though.

She seems to have been around for a long time. I think its better to get some new blood in after awhile.
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




KTG17 wrote:
I think Germany is going to regret opening the floodgates to refugees in the future and history might look back at her in a negative light.
There was no opening of floodgates, it's just the west has meddled enough in the middle east to cause some of the problems that led to a relatively huge amount of people in crisis who became refugees. Refugees don't move away from home for the fun of it. Some of the convoluted reasons people give for "fake refugees" abusing the system are similar to the stuff one hears about rape victims who accuse their attackers. Somehow those devil's advocates forget the harsh conditions and more or less complete lack of upside that has for some fictional version of "economic refugee" (similar to attention seeking fake rape accusers, the devil's advocates forget to imagine how rape victims/accusers get actually treated and instead imagine their own fictional and glamorous version).

But somehow the chance/possibility of ending up in Germany and being accepted (if they survive until they are here) is seen as some sort of opportunistic thing to do for "refugees" instead of seeing it as something only really desperate people would even be willing to go through. There may be a few who are really trying to do this (for whatever reason: economic, terrorism,…) but each other those objectives can usually be achieved easier, faster, and cheaper by just planning better and not trying a "fake refugee" gamble.

My question would be: Why would people look negatively at her for showing compassion to people who were in need of help and had nowhere else to go? I would get, maybe, naive but negative?
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: