Germany becoming ungovernable, constitutional changes realistic?

[latent aaaack]

I'm sick of US politics but I know little about other countries' elections and politics. So my thoughts on this are...is Germany really becoming ungovernable? Really?

Is anyone even listening to this guy's advice to change the constitution of Germany to make it more like France's to stop it from being immobilized by a six party system?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/06/germany1

Germany risks becoming ungovernable, condemned to a new era of unstable minority rule, fragile coalitions, and lame duck chancellors, a former German head of state warned today....

We are dealing with a fundamental shift in our system of government," said Herzog in a lengthy analysis in Munich's Süddeutsche Zeitung. "It will be increasingly difficult to form and maintain stable absolute majorities. Put plainly, the danger of minority governments will grow....

Calling for an overhaul of the rules fixing how Germany forms its governments, Herzog raised the spectre of the Weimar Republic...

Herzog warned that the entrenchment of the hard left in German politics is likely to be mirrored by the emergence of a stronger extreme right, turning Germany into a six-party system.

"The possibility of a sixth party, which would not need to be neo-fascist, cannot be quite excluded."...

He preferred the French system of run-offs for parliamentary seats because it favoured the big parties while leaving more scope for the small parties to strike bargains...

[mrbaracuda]

If the main parties, namely CDU/CSU and SPD keep losing votes and can't form either a grand coalition, CDU/CSU + SPD, or the usual CDU/CSU + FDP or SPD + Green Party, then yes, it will become very difficulty and can even reach a state where Germany will become ungovernable in the terms laid out by Herzog in my opinion.

Look at the election in Hessen: The election was 27.01 and they haven't formed a new parliament yet. SPD doesn't want to have a grand coalition with the CDU, the Green party doesn't want to form a coalition with the CDU and can't get the majority together with the SPD. The FDP and CDU can't get the majority either and The Left party is isolated after the debacle of the SPD, which kept saying they won't form a coalition with The Left. Then the SPD wanted to work with The Left after the election but couldn't because of one of their party members who would not tolerate it, so they didn't reach a majority in their own party for a SPD + Green Party + The Left coalition.

Now, imagine there was a sixth party and the general election is coming up. Horrible.

Here (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid253/index.shtml) you can find the results of Hessen.

Same problem in Hamburg: Click here (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid255/index.shtml) for the results. As you can see, neither can the CDU with her traditional coalition partner FDP form a coalition, nor can the SPD with her traditional partner the Green Party form a coalition. As for the SPD, they couldn't even form a coalition out of SPD + Green Party + The Left. And since both CDU and SPD don't want a grand coalition, the CDU is talking to the Green Party now, which is as far as I know a political innovation for Germany.

[fuelair]

Oh where, oh where is Oliver to tell us why lots of little parties are good for us!!!!

[a_unique_person]

It's a fine balance. Too few big parties are bad as well.

[egslim]

Look at the election in Hessen: The election was 27.01 and they haven't formed a new parliament yet. SPD doesn't want to have a grand coalition with the CDU, the Green party doesn't want to form a coalition with the CDU and can't get the majority together with the SPD. The FDP and CDU can't get the majority either and The Left party is isolated after the debacle of the SPD, which kept saying they won't form a coalition with The Left. Then the SPD wanted to work with The Left after the election but couldn't because of one of their party members who would not tolerate it, so they didn't reach a majority in their own party for a SPD + Green Party + The Left coalition.
Sounds more like a mentality than a constitutional problem.

It is the voters who ultimately decide which parties should form a coalition. There are very few valid reasons for a party to refuse cooperation with another party if the electoral results indicate they should. As soon as the party leaders accept that fact of life the "constitutional crisis" will be solved.

[Cleon]

Oh where, oh where is Oliver to tell us why lots of little parties are good for us!!!!

Uh...The solution Herzog proposes also involves "lots of little parties."

[littlehulkster]

Clearly, the solution is to vote in another insane Austrian with a top lip mustache and a good working relationship with Hugo Boss.

[mrbaracuda]

Sounds more like a mentality than a constitutional problem.

It is the voters who ultimately decide which parties should form a coalition. There are very few valid reasons for a party to refuse cooperation with another party if the electoral results indicate they should. As soon as the party leaders accept that fact of life the "constitutional crisis" will be solved.

While you're right that the voters decide, it's unthinkable to form a coalition with certain parties because of what you call mentality. It's not just the mentality, it's the whole party program and not enough points both can agree on. Now imagine three parties or even four trying to establish a coalition.

The Left party for example is a radical left party and the successor of the East German SED, which became the PDS after the German reunification and merged with its West German offspring WASG, resulting in what we know as The Left. In my opinion only the greedy elements of the SPD want to form a coalition with The Left at the moment, or how I like to call them: the Utopian Party.

The SPD is going left towards them and so is even the former "tiny bit right-wing, foremost central" party CDU. Problem is, many voters are either voting for The Left because they're, to be honest, dumb and fall for their utopian demands or vote for them just to protest. It's The Left party in my opinion that is a problem at the moment, because it's syphoning votes off of the other parties. That and the trend of low turnouts.

As seen in Hessen, the electoral results indicate they should form a great coalition, which mainly the SPD does not want if I'm not mistaken. But now that their plan of a SPD + Green Party + The Left failed, they might have to form a grand coalition - or have new elections in Hessen.

As for your "fact of life": the CDU talking to the Green Party is difficult because the CDU for example wants to maintain brown coal plants or deepen the Elbe that leads into Hamburg, so bigger ships can access the harbour. The Green Party is against both. I'm curious as to how their talks will turn out.

It's not as easy as you might think and even if they accept "that fact of life", they can block each other in the process afterwards.

What worries me personally is the course of the CDU and the results you can see in Hessen (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid253/analysewanderung6.shtml), in Niedersachsen (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid254/analysewanderung3.shtml) and in Hamburg (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid255/analysewanderung0.shtml). Nichtwähler = someone who did not vote at all; Andere = other.

[marksman]

I'm sorry, but I will find your argument unconvincing unless it is supported by a series of five or more one-hour YouTube videos, only six seconds of each video being relevant to your point.

[MRC_Hans]

I think that the thought of a multipartite system is frightening to many, but having lived with one for over half a century, I can tell you that it is just a way of living. Of course, big parties which have been used to having full dominance when in office will have a learning curve :rolleyes:.

IIRR, the record for a Danish parlament is 12 parties represented. Currently, we have 10.

Hans

[Phaedrus74]

What worries me personally is the course of the CDU and the results you can see in Hessen (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid253/analysewanderung6.shtml), in Niedersachsen (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid254/analysewanderung3.shtml) and in Hamburg (http://stat.tagesschau.de/wahlarchiv/wid255/analysewanderung0.shtml). Nichtwähler = someone who did not vote at all; Andere = other.

What causes the CDU to lose so many voters? Länderpolitik is rarely covered here in the Netherlands, but I had the impression that Merkel was doing an okay job. Has this no influence on the elections in the Bundesländer? Or are de CDU politicians simply doing a bad job?

[mrbaracuda]

What causes the CDU to lose so many voters? Länderpolitik is rarely covered here in the Netherlands, but I had the impression that Merkel was doing an okay job. Has this no influence on the elections in the Bundesländer? Or are de CDU politicians simply doing a bad job?

I'm not sure which other factors can be attributed to the loss, but the main problem seems to be the CDU's pandering to the left, thus moving slightly away from the center as well as other things like their position on Islam and migrants with a muslim background, with the minister of the interior (CDU) leading the "Integrationsgipfel", the integration summit, which is clearly failing, not only because the Turkish-muslim organisations could not to this day accept our constitution, but because Schäuble, the minister of the interior is even giving in to demands, which adds to the voters' decisions. Hardly a good thing for a Christian Democratic Party, heh. As well as a widely spread feeling of social injustice, carefully fostered by The Left and,then as a reaction, SPD.

Of course the overall performance has an influence on the Länder (states) and affects their policy, but the Länder are own their own pretty much when it comes to state politics. You have to keep in mind that Germany's still in a state of reform and change of its labour politics. Although it's overall going up and unemployment down, the felt state of many citizens is quite low or in the negative, especially when it comes to the reforms. Here The Left comes in with their utopian demands and the SPD, who doesn't want to lose voters to The Left.

Overall I'd say the CDU has lost her "bite"; she does not counter the opposition properly and doesn't take advantage of many things in the public discourse. If she were to get back to the center-slightly right position and would be clearer on some points like in the integration summit and also deny demands and follow through her own agenda as a center-party, I think voters would come back.

ETA: As an example: The left (not the party now) is strong and effective in Germany. Hessen's minister Koch tried to capitalize on an event that took place shortly before Christmas, where a retired ~80 years old man was almost beaten to death by a Turk and a Greek, because he told them not to smoke in the smoke free subway. Hessen is one of the safer states in terms of criminal statistics, yet the left, SPD, Green Party and The Left tried, in parts successfully, to brand Koch as a racist etc, because one of Koch's party programs he ran on was to do more against criminal foreigners.

[Phaedrus74]

I'm not sure which other factors can be attributed to the loss, but the main problem seems to be the CDU's pandering to the left, thus moving slightly away from the center as well as other things like their position on Islam and migrants with a muslim background, with the minister of the interior (CDU) leading the "Integrationsgipfel", the integration summit, which is clearly failing, not only because the Turkish-muslim organisations could not to this day accept our constitution, but because Schäuble, the minister of the interior is even giving in to demands, which adds to the voters' decisions. Hardly a good thing for a Christian Democratic Party, heh. As well as a widely spread feeling of social injustice, carefully fostered by The Left and,then as a reaction, SPD.


This is something I recognize. We had (have?) similar problems in the Netherlands. But the CDA (equiv. CDU) was relatively isolated from the anti-multiculturalist backlash, the PvdA (SPD) intially took the heaviest blows but in the end it seems that the VVD (FDP) has become permanently fragmented whereas the PvdA has pretty much recovered.


Of course the overall performance has an influence on the Länder (states) and affects their policy, but the Länder are own their own pretty much when it comes to state politics. You have to keep in mind that Germany's still in a state of reform and change of its labour politics. Although it's overall going up and unemployment down, the felt state of many citizens is quite low or in the negative, especially when it comes to the reforms. Here The Left comes in with their utopian demands and the SPD, who doesn't want to lose voters to The Left.


Labormarket reforms are without a doubt the biggest challenge for Germany (and France) and I understand that these cause a great deal of unrest. clever politicking by the Left party does pose a thread. On the other hand when they come to be in a position where they would have to carry the burden of government they might (or will probably) chicken out (like the SP did over here) since they would have to make too many concessions.


Overall I'd say the CDU has lost her "bite"; she does not counter the opposition properly and doesn't take advantage of many things in the public discourse. If she were to get back to the center-slightly right position and would be clearer on some points like in the integration summit and also deny demands and follow through her own agenda as a center-party, I think voters would come back.

Living in a country where the Christian Democrats' defining characteristic is enabling either a left-wing or right-wing majority, "lack of bite" is pretty much synonymous with them. I can see why you are concerned that a "lack of bite" might come to be perceived as a "lack of substance".

I hope (and trust) that it will work out in the long run.

Thanks for you response...

[mrbaracuda]

the CDA (equiv. CDU) was relatively isolated from the anti-multiculturalist backlash, the PvdA (SPD) intially took the heaviest blows but in the end it seems that the VVD (FDP) has become permanently fragmented whereas the PvdA has pretty much recovered.

[...]

Thanks for you response...

You're welcome. I got to ask you about that anti-multiculturalist backlash though. What happened?

[Phaedrus74]

You're welcome. I got to ask you about that anti-multiculturalist backlash though. What happened?

Are you familiar with Pim Fortuyn (he got assassinated a couple of years back)? He launched a bid for government shortly before the events of 9-11 his platform (initially) was that the "purple" coalition of the nineties (PvdA, VVD and D'66) had all but ruined dutch government by being basically spineless jerks. [That they made it possible for same-sex couples to get married or that they legalised euthanasia apparently wasn't very impressive].

He initially became popular because of the fact that the dot-com bubble had just burst causing wide-spread economic insecurity. After the events of 9-11 he became a vocal critic of radical Islam and he succeeded in convincing a large number of people that especially the PvdA had negelected to monitor and support the integration of guest workers of Maroccan and Turkish descent and their children. This led (after his assassination by a left-wing loon) to the tightening of immigration laws, integration exams and a general distrust of muslims as exemplified by the popularity of one issue-politicians like Geert Wilders and Rita Verdonk.

This is, in a rather roomy nutshell, the anti-multiculturalist backlash. Currently it is believed that Pim Fortuyn had a point, namely that reluctance to assist people to integrate in society (because of an unsubstantiated fear of assimilation by force) is tantamount to abandoning them to the whims of fate.

[Georg]

As an example: The left (not the party now) is strong and effective in Germany. Hessen's minister Koch tried to capitalize on an event that took place shortly before Christmas, where a retired ~80 years old man was almost beaten to death by a Turk and a Greek, because he told them not to smoke in the smoke free subway. Hessen is one of the safer states in terms of criminal statistics, yet the left, SPD, Green Party and The Left tried, in parts successfully, to brand Koch as a racist etc, because one of Koch's party programs he ran on was to do more against criminal foreigners.


I beg to differ. Koch is a racist. Outside his party he did not have much support for his campaign. Some support, yes, for example from the NPD, which is the most successful Nazi party in Germany in the moment.
Playing the "criminal foreigner card" was exactly why the CDU had the bad result in Hessen. That is not even disputed in the CDU. You can read the election analysis here. (www.kas.de//db_files/dokumente/7_dokument_dok_pdf_12893_1.pdf?080204161035)
The analysis is of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, which is very close to the CDU, so definitely not a left source. Scroll down to the bottom of page 5. (It´s a pdf)

Criminal statistics: Hessen had quite the biggest rise of youth criminality in Germany during the time of his reign (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,528358,00.html) , which made his campaign ring hollow.

[Francesca R]

Germany ungovernable? To my knowledge, with the exception of Schroeder calling (and losing) an election early, German governments almost always run to full term and are very difficult to unseat. Compared to countries like . . . . everywhere else in Europe.

Is that incorrect?

The idea of a "grand coalition" is rather odd though. That's what I tend to think of Japan's LDP as. But grand coalitions running Germany are not all that common, are they?

[Georg]

Germany ungovernable? To my knowledge, with the exception of Schroeder calling (and losing) an election early, German governments almost always run to full term and are very difficult to unseat. Compared to countries like . . . . everywhere else in Europe.

Is that incorrect?


That is not incorrect, but the situation is different now with the left party (I like the expression "Utopian party", mrbaracuda) entering the parliaments. Germany will become more difficult to govern, but I don´t think that it will become ungovernable. And I´m all for a system with more than two parties, because it means we can choose amongst more than two turds. :)

[Beerina]

If by "ungovernable", you mean "paralyzed such that it cannot pass more laws", then isn't that a good thing?

I would not be in a rush to re-arrange things such that the power hungry find it easier to begin exercising their power. Would that more nations were "ungovernable".

[Chaos]

Germany ungovernable? To my knowledge, with the exception of Schroeder calling (and losing) an election early, German governments almost always run to full term and are very difficult to unseat. Compared to countries like . . . . everywhere else in Europe.

Is that incorrect?

You´re thinking of Italy, for example, aren´t you? :) (my apologies to any Italian forum members there might be...)

But I agree with you... for example Helmut Kohl staying in power for 16 years might not have been for the best of the country, but it did prove that we´re governable.

The idea of a "grand coalition" is rather odd though. That's what I tend to think of Japan's LDP as. But grand coalitions running Germany are not all that common, are they?

Our current one if the second... I think the first was some time in late 60´s - I´d have to look that up.

The advantage of the grand coalition is that there is no strong opposition who can ruin things by simply blockading everything out of spite. Both parties have an incentive to make things happen, because then they can take credit for the good stuff that happens, and lay blame for it on their partner.

[Francesca R]

You´re thinking of Italy, for example, aren´t you? :) (my apologies to any Italian forum members there might be...)Italy is one of the most striking examples of revolving-door administrations, but I think almost all European democracies suffer more early (ahead of schedule) changes of prime minister / dissolutions of parliament than Germany does.

The advantage of the grand coalition is that there is no strong opposition who can ruin things by simply blockading everything out of spite. Both parties have an incentive to make things happen, because then they can take credit for the good stuff that happens, and lay blame for it on their partner.I see it as a disadvantage that there is no credible opposition in such eventualities, and a de-facto one-party state (like Japan) which undermines democracy and government IMO.

[mrbaracuda]

I beg to differ. Koch is a racist. Outside his party he did not have much support for his campaign. Some support, yes, for example from the NPD, which is the most successful Nazi party in Germany in the moment.

So what makes him a racist? The support of the NPD?

Playing the "criminal foreigner card" was exactly why the CDU had the bad result in Hessen. That is not even disputed in the CDU. You can read the election analysis here. (www.kas.de//db_files/dokumente/7_dokument_dok_pdf_12893_1.pdf?080204161035)
The analysis is of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, which is very close to the CDU, so definitely not a left source. Scroll down to the bottom of page 5. (It´s a pdf)

The election result matched the predictions one week earlier, see page 46 of your KAS-PDF. I'll read the whole thing later. To blame only one part of the agenda that only got on about a month before the election for the loss of 12% is too far-fetched in my opinion though.

Criminal statistics: Hessen had quite the biggest rise of youth criminality in Germany during the time of his reign (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,528358,00.html) , which made his campaign ring hollow.

A rise of 14-18 year old criminals, yes. That's probably why he tackled the laws for the base, the younger ages. Those 14-18 year old criminals are probably mainly repeat offenders. (ETA) What made part of his campaign ring hollow in my opinion was that he picked this up as part of his agenda so late and his unpopular solutions, not the rise in criminality. After a short look over the KAS paper I think it agrees.

[mrbaracuda]

it means we can choose amongst more than two turds. :)

So which "turd" do you usually vote for? :confused:

[mrbaracuda]

Helmut Kohl staying in power for 16 years might not have been for the best of the country, but it did prove that we´re governable.

The Green Party was very weak during the Kohl-era. Now the Green Party is as strong as the FDP, which helped the CDU/CSU so far and the newcomer is The Left Party. So you can't really compare that with today in my opinion.

[ZeeGerman]

So what makes him a racist? The support of the NPD?



The election result matched the predictions one week earlier, see page 46 of your KAS-PDF. I'll read the whole thing later. To blame only one part of the agenda that only got on about a month before the election for the loss of 12% is too far-fetched in my opinion though.



A rise of 14-18 year old criminals, yes. That's probably why he tackled the laws for the base, the younger ages. Those 14-18 year old criminals are probably mainly repeat offenders. (ETA) What made part of his campaign ring hollow in my opinion was that he picked this up as part of his agenda so late and his unpopular solutions, not the rise in criminality. After a short look over the KAS paper I think it agrees.


I wouldn't call him a racist, but he is definitely a reckless opportunist (he is also a 1st degree ********), who cares about exactly one thing - himself staying in power. His pushing the "we have too many juvenile immigrants offenders" right after the incident in Munich was nothing than a blatant attempt to turn the election to his favor after the SPD gained on him more and more. He did the same the elections before when he campained heavily against the immigration law (being proposed by the Red-Green federal government) and thankfully he fell flat on his nose this time. Did I mention that he is a 1st degree ********? Never mind.
Not that I like the flip-flopping of the SPD about possible cooperations with The Left. If they don't get rid of Kurt Beck (another 1st degree ********) soon, the SPD might as well call it a day and quit. We've had enough of overweight, self-pleased "Pfälzer" (for our non-German fellas: I'm referring to Helmut Kohl ) calling the shots in Germany for the next 50 years if you ask me.


While I don't see how an additional party in the system would render us ungovernable, I'd be in favor of something like this:

After an election, the parties have 2 months time to form a coalition capable of forming a government with an >= 60% majority.
If that fails, a runoff between parties >20% in the 1. election takes place with winner takes it all.

Additionally, no more than two terms for any given chancellor (I really like that about the US system).

Zee

[egslim]

While you're right that the voters decide, it's unthinkable to form a coalition with certain parties because of what you call mentality. It's not just the mentality, it's the whole party program and not enough points both can agree on. Now imagine three parties or even four trying to establish a coalition.
In the Netherlands we currently have a coalition between socialists, centre-right christian democrats and a small, conservative christian party. Cooperation between the first and third of those three is crazy, but they're pulling it off.
Before that we had coalitions between socialists and free market liberals with a smaller democrat party thrown in. They lasted for quite some time.

It's a matter of mentality, because the central issue has to be the election result, not the party program. The latter can be compromised on during negotiations, no matter how painful. The first is set in stone.

As for your "fact of life": the CDU talking to the Green Party is difficult because the CDU for example wants to maintain brown coal plants or deepen the Elbe that leads into Hamburg, so bigger ships can access the harbour. The Green Party is against both. I'm curious as to how their talks will turn out.
Then they can either maintain brown coal plants and not deepen the Elbe, or vice versa. Neither party will be happy with either, but politics is the art of compromise.

[Georg]

So what makes him a racist? The support of the NPD?


Poor choice of words, I admit. I should have called him a lying demagogue with right wing leanings instead. Or what zeegerman said in the rant-box.
And I certainly would rethink my position if it was supported by the Nazis.

The election result matched the predictions one week earlier, see page 46 of your KAS-PDF.


So? I thought his campaign started earlier, so the figures were already down and therefore I do not understand your argument. We´d have to see the polls before and after he started the campaign to see if that was the reason why the CDU lost so much.

I'll read the whole thing later. To blame only one part of the agenda that only got on about a month before the election for the loss of 12% is too far-fetched in my opinion though.


Surely not the whole 12 %, I agree, but: 3 or 4 % more, I´m too lazy to look it up now, and Koch could have formed a government with the FDP.
Without his campaign he probably would be Ministerpräsident with a majority in the parliament right now. I admit not being too sad that he isn´t, though...:D

snip

(ETA) What made part of his campaign ring hollow in my opinion was that he picked this up as part of his agenda so late and his unpopular solutions, not the rise in criminality. After a short look over the KAS paper I think it agrees.

Yep.

And I´m all for a system with more than two parties, because it means we can choose amongst more than two turds. :)

So which "turd" do you usually vote for? :confused:


The greens. No, not because I think they are brilliant, but because they don´t smell as bad as the others.

[Damien Evans]

It's a fine balance. Too few big parties are bad as well.

I think Australia has a pretty decent balance, but I'd like to see the democrats back in parliament again and that nutcase Steve Fielding out.

[mrbaracuda]

It's a matter of mentality, because the central issue has to be the election result, not the party program. The latter can be compromised on during negotiations, no matter how painful. The first is set in stone.


Then they can either maintain brown coal plants and not deepen the Elbe, or vice versa. Neither party will be happy with either, but politics is the art of compromise.

We'll see. I mean, they accomplished something similar by forming the grand coalition SPD + CDU before about two years ago, but it will get more difficulty with more parties and the big parties losing voters, which we as in Germany are not really used to have. I also don't think Germany'll become ungovernable in the sense of not accomplishing anything, but just very difficulty to govern with too many interests conflicting.

Poor choice of words, I admit. I should have called him a lying demagogue with right wing leanings instead. Or what zeegerman said in the rant-box.
And I certainly would rethink my position if it was supported by the Nazis.

Well, I think it's clear that your ideology is playing a major role here. Not only, but clearly your last statement seems to stem from it.

So? I thought his campaign started earlier, so the figures were already down and therefore I do not understand your argument. We´d have to see the polls before and after he started the campaign to see if that was the reason why the CDU lost so much.

Seit 2006 erreichte die CDU in der Sonntagsfrage bei Umfragen konstant Werte um
die 40 Prozent, blieb also deutlich hinter dem Ergebnis der Landtagswahl 2003 zurück.
Unmittelbar vor der Wahl hat sie schwach an Unterstützung eingebüßt und lag
in Umfragen zwischen 38 und 39 Prozent.

Summary

Since 2006 the surveys attested about 40% would vote the CDU in the surveys held on Sundays with the question "What would you vote if the election was to take place next Sunday?"


Surely not the whole 12 %, I agree, but: 3 or 4 % more, I´m too lazy to look it up now, and Koch could have formed a government with the FDP.
Without his campaign he probably would be Ministerpräsident with a majority in the parliament right now. I admit not being too sad that he isn´t, though...:D

Thus apparently the criminal (foreign) youths part did not affect the outcome by more than 1%. Which is reassuring, although it looks as if the propaganda worked on you and ZeeGerman when you whip out "lying demagogue" and "racist" without thinking too much.

The greens. No, not because I think they are brilliant, but because they don´t smell as bad as the others.

Well I guess now I know why you call someone a racist without backing your statement up in any way. :rolleyes:

[ZeeGerman]

...although it looks as if the propaganda worked on you and ZeeGerman when you whip out "lying demagogue" and "racist" without thinking too much.


Although I used strong words in a rant box, I explicitly stated that I would not call him a racist. I didn't call him a lying demagogue either.

So I would appreciate if you refrained from putting words in my mouth.

Additionally, the amount of thinking I put into posting on this board is clearly not assessable to you.


Zee

[mrbaracuda]

Although I used strong words in a rant box, I explicitly stated that I would not call him a racist. I didn't call him a lying demagogue either.

So I would appreciate if you refrained from putting words in my mouth.

Additionaly, the amount of thinking I put into posting on this board is clearly not assessable to you.


Zee

Next time I'll include "reckless opportunist" and "1st degree ********" to cover your amount of thinking then. Sorry I left you out and mainly addressed Georg, not you and that you didn't notice that.

[ZeeGerman]

Next time I'll include "reckless opportunist" and "1st degree ********" to cover your amount of thinking then. Sorry I left you out and mainly addressed Georg, not you and that you didn't notice that.

I noticed that you put words in my mouth.
You might also rethink the purpose of a rant box in an internet forum.

Zee

[mrbaracuda]

I noticed that you put words in my mouth.
You might also rethink the purpose of a rant box in an internet forum.

Zee

I'll say it again: I was first and foremost addressing Georg. I included you because of your rant box, since propaganda aims at emotions and well, your rant box was not much else.

I did not put words in your mouth, you're trying to put words in my mouth now, that being that I say you said something you didn't.

[ZeeGerman]

I'll say it again: I was first and foremost addressing Georg. I included you because of your rant box, since propaganda aims at emotions and well, your rant box was not much else.

I did not put words in your mouth, you're trying to put words in my mouth now, that being that I say you said something you didn't.

Fine, let's drop the issue of who put what where.
Still, you seem to think that my rant is evidence of me not thinking too much.

I'll tell you what: Let's keep the 1 degree arsehol out of the dicussion, because that's opinion, not argument (that's why it's in the rant box).
But a reckless opportunist? Even a liar? Did he or did he not lie about what he knew at what point in time in the "Spendenaffaire" (affair over party donations)?
Did he not proclaim himself as the "brutalstmöglicher Aufklärer" "most possble brutal investigator" before he was called on his lie?
By your own words, he did try to "capitalize on an event that took place shortly before Christmas, where a retired ~80 years old man was almost beaten to death by a Turk and a Greek, because he told them not to smoke in the smoke free subway." although "Hessen is one of the safer states in terms of criminal statistics" and although it took place in Munich, Bavaria. That's what I call an opportunist and the longer I think about it the firmer my position gets. Was it reckless or not to risk to damage the already difficult problems we have with questions regarding immigration and integration. Was it not reckless to "overlook" that those criminal youths are mostly born here in Germany and thus the problem of juvenile crime is not so much about the ethnic origin but the social status of the offender?


Zee

[mrbaracuda]

Fine, let's drop the issue of who put what where.
Still, you seem to think that my rant is evidence of me not thinking too much.

I'll tell you what: Let's keep the 1 degree arsehol out of the dicussion, because that's opinion, not argument (that's why it's in the rant box).
But a reckless opportunist? Even a liar? Did he or did he not lie about what he knew at what point in time in the "Spendenaffaire" (affair over party donations)?
Did he not proclaim himself as the "brutalstmöglicher Aufklärer" "most possble brutal investigator" before he was called on his lie?

We're talking about the Länderwahl in Hessen here, not that affair.

By your own words, he did try to "capitalize on an event that took place shortly before Christmas, where a retired ~80 years old man was almost beaten to death by a Turk and a Greek, because he told them not to smoke in the smoke free subway." although "Hessen is one of the safer states in terms of criminal statistics" and although it took place in Munich, Bavaria. That's what I call an opportunist and the longer I think about it the firmer my position gets.

It's not like I disagree. I don't care much about Koch, but what I care about is that the problem has been addressed, which other parties don't do, at least none I know of other than the extreme-right parties I ignore. In the KAS-paper the issue was called a "slumbering issue" and had a great resonance not only in Hessen but throughout the country.

Was it reckless or not to risk to damage the already difficult problems we have with questions regarding immigration and integration. Was it not reckless to "overlook" that those criminal youths are mostly born here in Germany and thus the problem of juvenile crime is not so much about the ethnic origin but the social status of the offender?

I don't get the first part. Risk to damage problems?

As for the latter, it is a problem of ethnic origin and the social structure of that ethnic origin. Turks and other groups with a muslim background, even if they themselves are not (very) religious, represent a growing majority in the statistics for juvenile offenders and other criminal activities the Spiegel mentions. Their mentality plays a major role in my opinion, thus it's not their social status, even though it can attribute to their behaviour. I can't hear this crap about "Germans have to do more for their integration" anymore, in case you're going to come up with that.

As you might have noticed, we don't need integration summits for other migrants but the Turks and other groups with a muslim background.

[Georg]

Well, I think it's clear that your ideology is playing a major role here. Not only, but clearly your last statement seems to stem from it.


Huh? Care to explain which ideology that would be? So far I was not aware that I am following any........
To conclude that because I do not like Koch is a bit far fetched in my opinion.
But I´m sure you are able to back it up better........

Thus apparently the criminal (foreign) youths part did not affect the outcome by more than 1%.


Let´s see: The polls had the CDU around 40% before the campaign started. They got 36,8 % at the election. That´s a difference of more than 3%. Only a difference of 1 or 2% regarding the polls, but if they lose 1 or 2% in only some weeks and the trend continues it is not a surprise they lose another 1% between the last poll and the election, right? With 40%, they would have been able to form a government with the FDP (9,4%), no? He did shoot himself in the foot, and yes, it´s a good thing that playing with fire did not work out for him this time.

Which is reassuring, although it looks as if the propaganda worked on you and ZeeGerman when you whip out "lying demagogue" and "racist" without thinking too much.


Both expressions were used by me only, credit where credit is due. ZeeGerman deserves the credit for "1st degree ********", a term that is appropriate for Koch, but that of course is a matter of opinion.
And I admitted that "racist" was a poor choice of words, didn´t I? As for demagogue, you don´t think his campaign was demagogic?
:dl:

We´ll have to agree to disagree on that one, then.
As for lying, that´s a proven fact. (http://www.zeit.de/2000/07/200007.hessen_.xml?page=1). If you are not able to admit that, that would be a hint that it´s not actually me who is ideology driven.




Georg

The greens. No, not because I think they are brilliant, but because they don´t smell as bad as the others.


Well I guess now I know why you call someone a racist without backing your statement up in any way. :rolleyes:


I admitted that it was a poor choice of words, didn´t I?
I said that I did not find the greens brilliant, didn´t I?
Since you defend Koch and dislike the greens so much, how does it fit in your world view that the CDU in Hessen would form a coalition with the FDP and the greens? An idea, besides my dislike for Koch, I´m not in principle opposed to? Who of us is ideology driven again?


So, keep on guessing, maybe someday you will score and be right.
Not this time, though.......

[Georg]

We're talking about the Länderwahl in Hessen here, not that affair.


BS. I didn´t say he was lying in this election process. I said he is a lying demagogue. The point still stands.

[mrbaracuda]

Huh? Care to explain which ideology that would be? So far I was not aware that I am following any........
To conclude that because I do not like Koch is a bit far fetched in my opinion.
But I´m sure you are able to back it up better........

You tell me which that is. It certainly doesn't seem to correspond with positions of the CDU. And you vote the Green Party for a reason, don't you?

That aside, your last statement struck me as silly. Let's say the NPD wants more green energy and supports the Green Party. Should they "rethink their position" because of the NPD support? Sorry, but that statement is inane.

Let´s see: The polls had the CDU around 40% before the campaign started. They got 36,8 % at the election. That´s a difference of more than 3%. Only a difference of 1 or 2% regarding the polls, but if they lose 1 or 2% in only some weeks and the trend continues it is not a surprise they lose another 1% between the last poll and the election, right? With 40%, they would have been able to form a government with the FDP (9,4%), no? He did shoot himself in the foot, and yes, it´s a good thing that playing with fire did not work out for him this time.

Over the course of 2 years they were at 40% and one week before the election took place they were between 38 and 39%. In any case, it's not the landslide loss you perceive it as, nor can I personally blame the end result solely on one part of his agenda.

Both expressions were used by me only, credit where credit is due. ZeeGerman deserves the credit for "1st degree ********", a term that is appropriate for Koch, but that of course is a matter of opinion.
And I admitted that "racist" was a poor choice of words, didn´t I? As for demagogue, you don´t think his campaign was demagogic?

Yes, you admitted it, but you still said it and did not take it back, but maintain the "lying demagogue" comment. And no, I don't think it was demagogic from what I could gather over here in NRW. Care to explain what you perceived as demagogic(, except for maybe the "vote The Left = vote communists" which in my opinion was rightfully added with the piggyback-KPD members entering many state parliaments by running on The Left's lists)?

As for lying, that´s a proven fact. (http://www.zeit.de/2000/07/200007.hessen_.xml?page=1). If you are not able to admit that, that would be a hint that it´s not actually me who is ideology driven.

I'm sure we both have lied in our life before. Does that make us a liar for life? Be my guest and point out what this has to do with his campaign and the connection to your claim he's a demagogue. A lying one at it.

I admitted that it was a poor choice of words, didn´t I?
I said that I did not find the greens brilliant, didn´t I?
Since you defend Koch and dislike the greens so much, how does it fit in your world view that the CDU in Hessen would form a coalition with the FDP and the greens? An idea, besides my dislike for Koch, I´m not in principle opposed to? Who of us is ideology driven again?

You are apparently. Me too, of course, but I can differentiate. Can you? Although you admit that it was a "poor choice of words", you got out the "demagogue" + liar-factor again.

And how a coalition of those three fits into my world view? They should go for it. I'm not opposed to this idea, nor the idea of the CDU forming a coalition with the Green Party in Hamburg. I'm secret tree hugger, but for example don't agree with the Green Party's energy policy, because it will render Germany very dependant on foreign energy.

As for Koch: I don't feel like I'm defending him, I just don't accept statements like "racist" or "lying demagogue" without any basis for such remarks.

So, keep on guessing, maybe someday you will score and be right.
Not this time, though.......

:rolleyes:

[mrbaracuda]

BS. I didn´t say he was lying in this election process. I said he is a lying demagogue. The point still stands.

Well then support it, because I can't figure out why he's a (lying) demagogue. Though it seems to fit the Green Party mentality to call people demagogues and racist for no good reason.

And no, not BS. We are talking about the election, although we should come back to the original topic. Why else the KAS-paper etc, if we're not talking about the election in Hessen? If you want to talk about Koch, I'm not too interested. :rolleyes:

[Georg]

You tell me which that is.


No. You made the claim, you back it up or you should take it back. To assert that I follow an ideology without being able to even name it is stupid.


It certainly doesn't seem to correspond with positions of the CDU. And you vote the Green Party for a reason, don't you?


Ah, everyone not following the CDU follows an ideology? Is that it?
That´s funny. The reason why I vote green has been told: They smell less than the other turds. How is voting for a party the same as following an ideology?

That aside, your last statement struck me as silly. Let's say the NPD wants more green energy and supports the Green Party. Should they "rethink their position" because of the NPD support? Sorry, but that statement is inane.


No, it is not. "To rethink" does not automatically mean the same as "to change". And to have support by Nazi-scumbags surely is a reason to rethink one´s position. Da evil joos agree: (http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/koch18.html)

"Das Niveau des Wahlkampfes von Herrn Ministerpräsident Roland Koch unterscheidet sich kaum noch von dem der NPD", sagte der Generalsekretär des Zentralrats der Juden in Deutschland, Stephan Kramer. Er warnte davor, Vorurteile gegenüber Ausländern zu schüren. Es gebe bereits "erste Anzeichen, dass vor allem die NPD und andere rechtsextreme Gruppen die Debatte nutzen". Kramer nannte es unverantwortlich, wenn Politiker hier mit dem Feuer spielen. "Wir brauchen scheinbar keine Programme gegen Rechts, sondern Erziehungs- und Ethikkurse für einige Politiker", kritisierte er.

But they are also ideology driven, I guess?

Over the course of 2 years they were at 40% and one week before the election took place they were between 38 and 39%.


And another week later another 1% down. How does that contradict what I say? Hint: It doesn´t.

In any case, it's not the landslide loss you perceive it as, nor can I personally blame the end result solely on one part of his agenda.



I did not say landslide loss, stop building strawmen.
Again: With the 40% of the polls before he started the campaign, he would have a majority with the FDP.


Yes, you admitted it, but you still said it and did not take it back,


for the gazillionth time: I said it was a poor choice of words. How is that different from taking it back? Don´t be childish.

but maintain the "lying demagogue" comment. And no, I don't think it was demagogic from what I could gather over here in NRW. Care to explain what you perceived as demagogic(, except for maybe the "vote The Left = vote communists" which in my opinion was rightfully added with the piggyback-KPD members entering many state parliaments by running on The Left's lists)?


I do maintain it, because that´s what he is, see below.


I'm sure we both have lied in our life before. Does that make us a liar for life? Be my guest and point out what this has to do with his campaign and the connection to your claim he's a demagogue. A lying one at it.


Some strawmen again:
Show me where I have said "liar for life". Can you?
Show me where I have said he was lying in this campaign. Can you?
I said he is a liar, and I backed it up. Do you admit that?
As for the demagogue part:

Demagogie betreibt, wer bei günstiger Gelegenheit öffentlich für ein politisches Ziel wirbt, indem er der Masse schmeichelt, an ihre Gefühle, Instinkte und Vorurteile appelliert, ferner sich der Hetze und Lüge schuldig macht, Wahres übertrieben oder grob vereinfacht darstellt, die Sache, die er durchsetzen will, für die Sache aller Gutgesinnten ausgibt, und die Art und Weise, wie er sie durchsetzt oder durchzusetzen vorschlägt, als die einzig mögliche hinstellt." Nach Martin Morlock, (1977): Hohe Schule der Verführung. Ein Handbuch der Demagogie. Econ Verlag: Wien/Düsseldorf, S.24

or in English:

Demagogy (also demagoguery) (Ancient Greek δημαγωγία, from δῆμος dēmos "people" and ἄγειν agein "to lead") refers to a political strategy for obtaining and gaining political power by appealing to the popular prejudices, emotions, fears and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalist or populist themes.

quotes are from wiki.

I´d say his campaign regarding the foreign youth criminals fits this definition very well.


You are apparently.

Again, which ideology?

Me too, of course, but I can differentiate. Can you? Although you admit that it was a "poor choice of words", you got out the "demagogue" + liar-factor again.

Yes, because that description fits well, as explained above.

And how a coalition of those three fits into my world view? They should go for it. I'm not opposed to this idea, nor the idea of the CDU forming a coalition with the Green Party in Hamburg. I'm secret tree hugger, but for example don't agree with the Green Party's energy policy, because it will render Germany very dependant on foreign energy.


Wow, we agree on some things! Whom do you vote for, by the way?

As for Koch: I don't feel like I'm defending him, I just don't accept statements like "racist" or "lying demagogue" without any basis for such remarks.


Basis explained above. He is a liar and a demagogue.

[Georg]

Though it seems to fit the Green Party mentality to call people demagogues and racist for no good reason.

And you are the one that stated he is able to differentiate? Just wow.

And no, not BS. We are talking about the election, although we should come back to the original topic. Why else the KAS-paper etc, if we're not talking about the election in Hessen? If you want to talk about Koch, I'm not too interested. :rolleyes:


In this thread, a number of topics has been discussed: Germany ungovernable, why the CDU lost so much, the character traits of Mr. Koch and not only the elections in Hessen and elsewhere.
For someone not too interested in talking about Koch, you talk a lot to defend him.....if I´m not too interested in discussing a topic, I just don´t do it.

[ZeeGerman]

Out of curiosity: Wo in Bayern steckst'n Du?

Zee (in Erlangen)

[Georg]

In Augschburg.

[mrbaracuda]

No. You made the claim, you back it up or you should take it back. To assert that I follow an ideology without being able to even name it is stupid.

Well let's see. You vote the Green Party, dislike the CDU, bring up the NPD frequently.. I'd say some green energy leftist ideology.

Ah, everyone not following the CDU follows an ideology? Is that it?
That´s funny. The reason why I vote green has been told: They smell less than the other turds. How is voting for a party the same as following an ideology?

:rolleyes:


No, it is not. "To rethink" does not automatically mean the same as "to change". And to have support by Nazi-scumbags surely is a reason to rethink one´s position. Da evil joos agree: (http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/koch18.html)


But they are also ideology driven, I guess?

Sure they are and don't like the NPD being able to point to Koch and say "See, he's also for it!", thus gaining any legitimacy for themselves, which is understandable. And sure it does mean to change, what else could you have possibly meant with "he should rethink his position"? Come on. :rolleyes:

Oh wait, I guess he should just shut up about the rise in juvenile offenders with certain backgrounds, is that it?

And another week later another 1% down. How does that contradict what I say? Hint: It doesn´t.

I'd say it was first and foremost the negative media coverage that caused this, not his campaign itself. So, yes, in a sense. Even you called him a racist, but sure, go ahead. I don't care.

I did not say landslide loss, stop building strawmen.
Again: With the 40% of the polls before he started the campaign, he would have a majority with the FDP.

I'm not building strawmen, first you blamed the loss of 12% on that one part of his agenda alone. But let's stop splitting hairs. They did not get enough to continue with the FDP, end of story. Whether it was 1% or 3% they lost with the criminal stuff, the negative coverage or not, it's history.

for the gazillionth time: I said it was a poor choice of words. How is that different from taking it back? Don´t be childish.

In any case: What led you to call him a racist without anything to back this statement up? It was the emotional media coverage, wasn't it?

I do maintain it, because that´s what he is, see below.

Some strawmen again:
Show me where I have said "liar for life". Can you?
Show me where I have said he was lying in this campaign. Can you?
I said he is a liar, and I backed it up. Do you admit that?
As for the demagogue part:

or in English:

quotes are from wiki.

I´d say his campaign regarding the foreign youth criminals fits this definition very well.

Oh that's very original now.

Let's see, I can also quote some. Let's split some hairs:

Demagoge <urspr.>Volksführer,<heute abwertend> = Volksverführer
Demagogie Aufwiegelung, Volksverführung
demagogisch hetzerisch, die Wahrheit verfälschend

Volksverführer jmd., der durch lügnerische Reden, falsche Versprechungen usw. andere für seine politischen Absichten einnimmt

Start working with material of his campaign if you really want to maintain your statement.

Whom do you vote for, by the way?

Isn't it obvious? NPD. Oh wait, I meant CDU or FDP. Maybe I should rethink my position though, when the CDU gets backed by a puny party like the NPD..

If only the SPD would heed your advice and rethink its position instead of moving further towards The Left Party.. :rolleyes:

[SDC]

If Germany is becoming "ungovernable," will it just kind of melt into the EU? Will regions break away, as (evidently) Flemish parts of Belgium, Scotland, and parts of Spain are attempting ?

Right now I'm reading H.Winkler's history of the Weimar republic. I'll start looking for similarities. (Joke.)

You guys have it so easy. I live in New York state. No woman is safe from the depredations of our politicians.

[Georg]

Well let's see. You vote the Green Party,


....and told you that I do that because the smell less than the other turds and not because I think they are brilliant.....but why listen to what I say if that would ruin your idiotic interpretation......

dislike the CDU


...did I really say that? Not following them does not necessarily equal disliking them.....
I said I dislike Koch, not the CDU, right? All of the democratic parties have some points I like, and a lot I don´t like. To chose the party which has more good and less bad points in my opinion is the normal way to go, isn´t it? How are you deciding whom you are voting for? Ideology?


bring up the NPD frequently..


which has to do what with anything? Every voter of a democratic party should be disgusted by them, how is that a sign for following an ideology?


I'd say some green energy leftist ideology.


Wrong. Try again. No, don´t even try. Since I´m not following any ideology, that wouldn´t make sense.....


Sure they are


Now it´s getting interesting. What ideology are the jews following? Care to explain?

and don't like the NPD being able to point to Koch and say "See, he's also for it!", thus gaining any legitimacy for themselves, which is understandable.


......and which is why his campaign was wrong. And applause from the wrong party (the NPD) would not have caused a media stir if it would have been for a different topic like energy politics or whatever bad analogy you used before. He got "beaten up" for handling exactly this topic like the Nazis do, and rightly so. Play with fire, take the risk you get burnt.

And sure it does mean to change, what else could you have possibly meant with "he should rethink his position"? Come on. :rolleyes:



Look it up in a dictionary. That´s not what it means. He could have adressed the problem solution-orientated and not demagogic, do you understand that now? Nobody said that there isn´t a problem.

Oh wait, I guess he should just shut up about the rise in juvenile offenders with certain backgrounds, is that it?


No. But he should have done his homework, you know, like not cutting down police and social workers, instead of playing the demagogue.



I'd say it was first and foremost the negative media coverage that caused this, not his campaign itself. So, yes, in a sense. Even you called him a racist, but sure, go ahead. I don't care.


He got the negative media coverage because he started an idiotic, demagogic campaign. The media would have had nothing bad to report if he had not acted like an idiot.


I'm not building strawmen,


They are still there for everyone to see. Denial does not make them go away.


first you blamed the loss of 12% on that one part of his agenda alone.


Where did I blame the loss of 12 % on that one part?. Show me. Or retract your claim. It´s getting boring.

In any case: What led you to call him a racist without anything to back this statement up? It was the emotional media coverage, wasn't it?


I think it´s clear that he isn´t a friend of immigrants. The choice of words was wrong, I tell you for the last time. After about 5 times, even you should get it.


Oh that's very original now.

Let's see, I can also quote some. Let's split some hairs:

Start working with material of his campaign if you really want to maintain your statement.



I thought you are aware of his campaign? Does locking away 12 year olds solve the problem? Does telling we should lock all criminal foreigner youths away longer solve the problem? And, like "zeeGerman said:

Was it not reckless to "overlook" that those criminal youths are mostly born here in Germany and thus the problem of juvenile crime is not so much about the ethnic origin but the social status of the offender?

Puleaasee........



Isn't it obvious? NPD. Oh wait, I meant CDU or FDP. Maybe I should rethink my position though, when the CDU gets backed by a puny party like the NPD..

If only the SPD would heed your advice and rethink its position instead of moving further towards The Left Party.. :rolleyes:



Sure. You ask me, you get an honest answer. I ask you back, you try to be funny (didn´t work, btw.) and don´t give an answer.
I´m truly impressed.

And you forgot to answer those questions, about your strawmen:

Show me where I have said "liar for life". Can you?
Show me where I have said he was lying in this campaign. Can you?
I said he is a liar, and I backed it up. Do you admit that?

[mrbaracuda]

Since you're still not using any of his campaign material, I rest my case.

[Georg]

Since you're still not using any of his campaign material, I rest my case.


Does locking away 12 year olds solve the problem? Does telling we should lock all criminal foreigner youths away longer solve the problem?


That was part of his campaign, right? You don´t even have a case.
And why are you not adressing all the other parts, you know, all that strawmen stuff? The questions from my last posts? I wonder why. Maybe because you can´t? Maybe because you´d have to admit that I did not say the things you put in my mouth, like you did with zeeGerman? Maybe because you can´t admit that you are wrong? Maybe because you are a coward? I´ll see........

[mrbaracuda]

That was part of his campaign, right? You don´t even have a case.
And why are you not adressing all the other parts, you know, all that strawmen stuff? The questions from my last posts? I wonder why. Maybe because you can´t? Maybe because you´d have to admit that I did not say the things you put in my mouth, like you did with zeeGerman? Maybe because you can´t admit that you are wrong? Maybe because you are a coward? I´ll see........

Maybe because you're just *********** annoying with your dissecting one-liners and cocky attitude. And yea, why not lock some failed 12 year olds away when everything else has failed and they can't get it right? You can deport them to Siberia for all I care.

[Georg]

Maybe because you're just *********** annoying with your dissecting one-liners and cocky attitude.


The usual excuse from people who are not able to answer direct questions, support their claims and admit that they are wrong.
What a surprise........
If you have problems with me or anybody else dissecting your claims and statements, then don´t make any. Someone should have told you that this is going to happen on this forum. If you don´t want to be attacked by me, stop lying about what I wrote and stop making statements about what I think and which ideology I am following, without having any clue and without being able to back it up. It´s that easy.

And yea, why not lock some failed 12 year olds away when everything else has failed and they can't get it right? You can deport them to Siberia for all I care.


Maybe because jail is exactly the wrong thing to get 12 year olds back on the right track again? Regarding the bolded part, you were the one that said:



I can't hear this crap about "Germans have to do more for their integration" anymore, in case you're going to come up with that.



That does not sound exactly like you´d be willing to try out "everything else" before locking the kids up, does it?
But it certainly makes you look like a hypocrite.........

[Oliver]

As a related sidequestion: Wann sind eigentlich Wahlen? :confused:

[Georg]

As a related sidequestion: Wann sind eigentlich Wahlen? :confused:

http://www.election.de/wahlkalender_ad.html

The one we are having our friendly discussion about is the Landtagswahl in Hessen which was in January.

[WildCat]

As a related sidequestion: Wann sind eigentlich Wahlen? :confused:
Hey Oliver, here is a thread in which you can advocate that Germany quit using the worthless Euro (a counterfeit fiat currency) and start using a Deutschmark backed by gold.

/derail

I think it's time you Germans admit the whole nation thing is a failure, and should split into city-states and principalities as it was for most of its history... ;)

Oh, and thanks for the work Baron von Steuben did with Washington's Continental Army! Not so happy with the Hessians though...

[Chaos]

Hey Oliver, here is a thread in which you can advocate that Germany quit using the worthless Euro (a counterfeit fiat currency) and start using a Deutschmark backed by gold.

/derail

Technically, it would be going back to gold backing. The German Empire had that until sometime during WW1; in fact I think they only introduced paper money in the 1880´s or 1890´s.

I think it's time you Germans admit the whole nation thing is a failure, and should split into city-states and principalities as it was for most of its history... ;)

If that means we get rid of those Bavarians and I no longer have to admit being from the same country as the pope, I´m all for it.:) No longer being in the same country as Oliver would also be a nice side benefit. :D

Oh, and thanks for the work Baron von Steuben did with Washington's Continental Army! Not so happy with the Hessians though...

No picking and choosing. We´re a package deal.

[dudalb]

If Germany is becoming "ungovernable," will it just kind of melt into the EU? Will regions break away, as (evidently) Flemish parts of Belgium, Scotland, and parts of Spain are attempting ?

Right now I'm reading H.Winkler's history of the Weimar republic. I'll start looking for similarities. (Joke.)

You guys have it so easy. I live in New York state. No woman is safe from the depredations of our politicians.

Hey, the Bavarians have never really liked the Prussians much.
Maybe it will got back to the way it was up until the 18th century, dozens of small jealous,squabbling principalaties.

[Gurdur]

.... Maybe it will got back to ... dozens of small jealous,squabbling principalaties.

The vision of Germany emulating JREF is entrancing but unrealistic.