German politics. Flinten-Uschi defying the laws of gravity

[dog-days]

15 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

...

 

Thanks @Mindwalker - just followed your suggestions. 

[Fragile Bird]

So what happened?

[Zorral]

6 hours ago, dog-days said:

Don't know German politics well enough to contribute to the debate, but can anyone recommend good German-language accounts to follow on Twitter? I'd like to start paying more attention to politics/current events/culture again, and Twitter helps by hooking my interest regularly.  At the moment, I just follow Der Spiegel. 

Just spent ten minutes looking up the coalition nicknames. 

The BBC's been following this all day (my time) as special coverage on its BBC The World broadcasts. I listen to it on the radio, but you can find it streaming on line too.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

So what happened?

General overview about German Electoral System

@dog-days
 

https://twitter.com/dwnews

Is a good enough starter for an overview over current German Politics issues. It's quite decent actually.

Deutsche Welle is basically a foreign language offspring of German Public Broadcasting.

 

[Arakan]

13 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I voted for Die Linke a couple of days ago, but I'm not holding my breath for rot-grün-rot.

Good man   

[Arakan]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd say Jamaica is the most likeliest scenario. The Greens desperately want to be in charge again. And Lindner has learned his lesson after the last election. He won't stand in the way of a coalition, either.

A Grand Coalition is only possible if Jamaica doesn't work.

The FDP won't agree to a coalition with the SPD and the Greens, but the Greens won't refuse an offer for a Jamaica coalition.

If the SPD were to be the strongest party they might be short Sondierungsgespräche for SPD-Greens-FDP, but that will only be pretense. If Laschet makes the race he'll forge a Jamaica coalition without much difficulty.

Might very well happen. But the risks for the Greens is huge. The party elite is one thing, the base something else. Here in Frankfurt or the broader Rhine Main Region the Green base is 100% anti Union. 

Yes, the party grandes are power horny but they will utterly disappoint the base. The corrupt CDU/CSU must go. 

That motherfucker Söder and his warnings of a „historic left shift“, what a demagogue. Meanwhile Thuringia and Saxony are in NeoNazi hands with the AFD as strongest party. Söder as a Franconian should take a look at his neighboring counties.

[Loge]

6 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

So what happened?

Big losses for the Christian Democrats, gains for the Social Democrats and the Greens. No clear winner as far as the two large parties are concerned. There's three possible coalitions. The current coalition could go on, but led by a Social Democrat as chancellor. Not likely. The other two possible coalition both involve Greens and Liberals. Looks like these two will talk first and if they can find an agreement it's for them to pick a chancellor. 

[Arakan]

To clarify: Liberals doesn’t mean liberal in the US Sense but rather in the 19th century Laisser-faire economic liberal sense. The closest US equivalent would be Tea Party / libertarian. But it’s all about money for them.

[The Marquis de Leech]

28 minutes ago, Arakan said:

To clarify: Liberals doesn’t mean liberal in the US Sense but rather in the 19th century Laisser-faire economic liberal sense. The closest US equivalent would be Tea Party / libertarian. But it’s all about money for them.

I'd say the closest US equivalent would probably be the Clintonian wing of the US Democrats.

Looking like a Traffic Light anyway...

[Arakan]

21 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

I'd say the closest US equivalent would probably be the Clintonian wing of the US Democrats.

Looking like a Traffic Light anyway...

I don’t know…the FDP since the 90s is all about money, minimal governmental intervention in markets, low tax for the „high performers“ of Society, the party for the wealthy, a lobby party. And the market is the best for everything. Social issues (citizen rights) are secondary, climate is secondary. Libertarian is surely their ideal but of course they are not stupid. Some government is needed, after all. The old FDP was different but they don’t exist anymore, their social agenda gone. 
 

Better name would be the Capitalist Party   

[Luzifer's right hand]

 

Lol

 

[Lord Varys]

7 hours ago, Arakan said:

Might very well happen. But the risks for the Greens is huge. The party elite is one thing, the base something else. Here in Frankfurt or the broader Rhine Main Region the Green base is 100% anti Union. 

Well, if that was really an issue then Kretschmann wouldn't have continued his coalition with the CDU after the last election. In general, the Greens want to be in charge again, and they have no issues working with the CDU and the FDP as quite a few coalitions show. In fact, they made it clear that they wanted grün-schwarz or schwarz-grün months ago when the polls indicated a very different outcome.

I mean, I can practically write the script: Lindner will say he cannot possible work with an SPD run by Esken and Walter-Borjans, and the Baerbock and Habeck will wring their hands and shed some crocodile tears and then they will say that the good of the state demands that they now set aside their own preferences - like the SPD did in 2017 - and form a government with Laschet and Lindner.

Also, Laschet will give both Lindner and Baerbock everything they ask for - and then some - to save his own neck. He can only continue his career if he becomes Chancellor. If he fails at that, he's finished. If they were to sack Laschet before a coalition can be formed then things might get more complicated, but I think the CDU folks are too smart for that. They will sharpen their knives now, but they will only stab Laschet if and when he truly fails at securing the chancellorship, and not before.

7 hours ago, Arakan said:

Yes, the party grandes are power horny but they will utterly disappoint the base. The corrupt CDU/CSU must go. 

That motherfucker Söder and his warnings of a „historic left shift“, what a demagogue. Meanwhile Thuringia and Saxony are in NeoNazi hands with the AFD as strongest party. Söder as a Franconian should take a look at his neighboring counties.

German anticommunism is very strong, we didn't need McCarthy for that ;-).

But overall, I think, it is a failure of the Left in general to not pay the other folks back in kind - the spectre of a coalition including the AfD is a real danger, especially in the eastern states, but nobody really plays this up as a danger.

[The Wondering Wolf]

3 hours ago, Arakan said:

I don’t know…the FDP since the 90s is all about money, minimal governmental intervention in markets, low tax for the „high performers“ of Society, the party for the wealthy, a lobby party. And the market is the best for everything. Social issues (citizen rights) are secondary, climate is secondary. Libertarian is surely their ideal but of course they are not stupid. Some government is needed, after all. The old FDP was different but they don’t exist anymore, their social agenda gone. 
 

Better name would be the Capitalist Party   

I think a huge difference to the Tea Party is the lack of religion. Capitalism was the result of Protestant ethic influencing society. But once established, you don't need the Protestant background anymore. Today the 'free market' serves as substitute religion. So the FDP is (religiously) a rather agnostic party and thus doesn't promote rules which are based on religion or tradition. You can smoke whatever you want, fuck and marry whomever you like and belief into whatever helps you to manage your life. Mostly there isn't even open racism (from time to time members say something racist, but they try to avoid it). And it makes sense, because homophobia, racism and exclusion is obstructive to capitalism. Companies have learned that, too, that's why they 'fight' against exclusion, because in the end they want everyone to be able to buy their products. In capitalism your are only excluded if you don't have money. But you are kind of right, that Social Darwinism always attracts maniacs with much money and few morals. So they exist in the FDP, they just have to stay in the background and can't promote their views openly, because the moment they become visible, the FDP drops out of any German parliament.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

A post-Merkel Germany just feels weird to say.

[Arakan]

48 minutes ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

I think a huge difference to the Tea Party is the lack of religion. Capitalism was the result of Protestant ethic influencing society. But once established, you don't need the Protestant background anymore. Today the 'free market' serves as substitute religion. So the FDP is (religiously) a rather agnostic party and thus doesn't promote rules which are based on religion or tradition. You can smoke whatever you want, fuck and marry whomever you like and belief into whatever helps you to manage your life. Mostly there isn't even open racism (from time to time members say something racist, but they try to avoid it). And it makes sense, because homophobia, racism and exclusion is obstructive to capitalism. Companies have learned that, too, that's why they 'fight' against exclusion, because in the end they want everyone to be able to buy their products. In capitalism your are only excluded if you don't have money. But you are kind of right, that Social Darwinism always attracts maniacs with much money and few morals. So they exist in the FDP, they just have to stay in the background and can't promote their views openly, because the moment they become visible, the FDP drops out of any German parliament.

Remembering the Möllemann FDP   

[A Horse Named Stranger]

5 hours ago, Arakan said:

To clarify: Liberals doesn’t mean liberal in the US Sense but rather in the 19th century Laisser-faire economic liberal sense. The closest US equivalent would be Tea Party / libertarian. But it’s all about money for them.

TEA party is a bit much. A good part of the element TEA-Party movement is underlying racism and the connected Law & Order policy stance. For all their faults, and for all the contempt I feel for them, they are not that keen on a police state.

The FDP is more like Paul Ryan without religious nonsense (and policies evolving from that).

So that is one of the fields where CDU/CSU can actually clash with the FDP. The Conservatives want to sharpen their profile with regards to security (policy) and migration, and there's a chance that the FDP will balk (alongside the Greens), if the conservatives get too needy/greedy. Söder has hinted that he doesn't want to sell out to the FDP on those issues and would prefer opposition status to that. Personally, I don't think the FDP will fight tooth and nails over it, as they are more likely to get their fiscal and economic wishes fullfilled with the CDU than the SPD, but time will tell.

On the other hand, I am inclined to believe, that the FDP is more likely to get the bloody ministry of finance in a SPD lead goverment. The Greens will probably insist on it, in a CDU lead goverment. If you don't set the agenda (chancellorship), you at least want the control over the purse. Funny to think how that office was seen as being the unpopular tax collector, while overseeing the ever growin national debt.

On a related note, I find it somehow funny/remarkable how much the foreign office has lost of its appeal. It used to be the office the vice-chancellors used to boost their popularity and profile not that long ago. Last time it was so much in demand it ended up in the hands of Heiko Maas

 

[Arakan]

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But overall, I think, it is a failure of the Left in general to not pay the other folks back in kind - the spectre of a coalition including the AfD is a real danger, especially in the eastern states, but nobody really plays this up as a danger.

Absolutely 100% agreed. The Linke wanted to appear government-ready, so they toned clear speak down quite much. IMO one of the main reasons they lost so much. There was so much ammunition to attack especially the corrupt CSU that Söder would have hidden crying in Nuremberg but they didn’t. Na na, always the same. When your opponent plays dirty you have to answer in kind, the voters otherwise think you weak. Or you have a personality like Scholz (basically the male Merkel) where it kinda fits.

 

[Arakan]

9 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

TEA party is a bit much. A good part of the element TEA-Party movement is underlying racism and the connected Law & Order policy stance. For all their faults, and for all the contempt I feel for them, they are not that keen on a police state.

The FDP is more like Paul Ryan without religious nonsense (and policies evolving from that).

So that is one of the fields where CDU/CSU can actually clash with the FDP. The Conservatives want to sharpen their profile with regards to security (policy) and migration, and there's a chance that the FDP will balk (alongside the Greens), if the conservatives get too needy/greedy. Söder has hinted that he doesn't want to sell out to the FDP on those issues and would prefer opposition status to that. Personally, I don't think the FDP will fight tooth and nails over it, as they are more likely to get their fiscal and economic wishes fullfilled with the CDU than the SPD, but time will tell.

On the other hand, I am inclined to believe, that the FDP is more likely to get the bloody ministry of finance in a SPD lead goverment. The Greens will probably insist on it, in a CDU lead goverment. If you don't set the agenda (chancellorship), you at least want the control over the purse. Funny to think how that office was seen as being the unpopular tax collector, while overseeing the ever growin national debt.

On a related note, I find it somehow funny/remarkable how much the foreign office has lost of its appeal. It used to be the office the vice-chancellors used to boost their popularity and profile not that long ago. Last time it was so much in demand it ended up in the hands of Heiko Maas

 

Yes. Tea Party is a bit much as the FDP really is not religious at all though don’t underestimate the racist and xenophobic underlayer within the FDP, especially until a few years ago. Granted, now there is the AFD as a new home for those (economic policies are almost identical). Anyway the FDP could be so much but they intend to be just about money. Otherwise I agree with your assessment. 

[Mindwalker]

13 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

So what happened?

This BBC clip gives a good quick summary. Even though the one question their reporter asks Scholz is: "Do you think you'll be sitting next to Boris Johnson?" LOL. What an incentive.

tl;dr:  Germans sent a message, trouble is, we just don't know what it was.

[Mindwalker]

5 hours ago, Arakan said:

I don’t know…the FDP since the 90s is all about money, minimal governmental intervention in markets, low tax for the „high performers“ of Society, the party for the wealthy, a lobby party. And the market is the best for everything. Social issues (citizen rights) are secondary, climate is secondary. Libertarian is surely their ideal but of course they are not stupid. Some government is needed, after all. The old FDP was different but they don’t exist anymore, their social agenda gone. 
 

Better name would be the Capitalist Party   

Small correction: Climate is totally important, but The Market will take care of it. Government bad.

Shockingly, most of the first-time voters voted for the FDP (liberals). Even more so than for the Greens.

@Jeordhi I second Stranger's suggestion. How could I forget my favorite/ only radio station!