Germany. SPD coalition with CDU/CSU leaves party youth out? What it means for Poland?

It could have gone well, or it could have gone badly.

It would have been good if I could have met the family members that I lost, but hey it could have gone really badly and Germanys dream of exterminating all poles by 1974 could have been reality and you would not have the bother with debating anything with us.

Fortunately fascism was defeated, as it always is.

Is it jon?

Always.

20th century style fascism may have been marginalized but the tyranny of the Left certainly hasn't.

The Left have dominated politics in Europe since the end of the war and today there has never been a time of greater instability, uncertainty, and deep erosion of freedom and trust.

Just as dangerous as any right wing Nazi as we poles know due to years of soviet left wing slavery.

Considering that this erosion of freedom is most keenly felt in Hungary, Poland and the USA, this erosion can hardly be blamed on the left. Not to mention that all large countries in Europe (Frane, Germany, Spain and Italy) are governed by centrist or even conservative parties.

Basically late-stage capitalism.

Go ask the 27 million that got eroded by Stalin.

No, they're all neoliberal societies with governments who don't really care about citizens, being far more interested in each other and in attracting capital.

Don't look at the rhetoric, look at the actions - it's all neoliberalism all the way down.

Wrong. The public in all those countries you listed (and you can add Germany and Austria among them) recently voted for right and center right politicians and parties. This was due not only to their large aging populations which naturally become more conservative once near or past retirement but also in response to neo-Marxist policies which threatened to put the demands of unwanted economic migrants ahead of the interests of the largely unemployed native youth in said countries.


Their politicians are nothing more than neo-Marxist wolves in centrist/conservative sheep's clothing.

France's Macron belonged to the Socialist Party before becoming an Independent.

Mad cow Merkel belonged to the communist youth movement and her globalist policies and top-down dictatorial style and socialization of problems she creates clearly stem from the heyday of the Communist International.

The governments in Spain and Italy are not centrist or conservative either.

Regardless, France, Spain and Italy all have shaky economies and Germany is living on borrowed time.

When the EU breaks ups in the next few years (and it will) no one will be voting for more socialism, open borders, and endless migration from the third world.

At that point the likes of you of course will be making aliyah in Israel.

And they will hang onto that for as long as possible. For all the strategists, most governments of stable countries are reactive.

I really don't know what else can be said to you Jon. In the face of overwhelming statistical evidence, you refuse to adjust your world view to the actual evidence in front of you, and instead continue to base how you see things on your feelings, and some perceived idea of social justice (correct me if I'm wrong). For instance, when we know that in Sweden since 2006 rapes have increased 50%, and murder has increased 80% since 2012, according to the Brottsförebyggande rådet, your response seems to be who cares? Well, average Swedes probably. Germany has shown that of the 10% increase in crime, 90% has been committed by asylum seekers.

I suppose this will be one of those times we don't learn from history. Insecurity will always cause people to seek out extremist politicians and governments, because all of the ancillary things like the economy, infrastructure, etc, is completely irrelevant without security for ones person and home. You dismiss the concerns of average working class people in those countries with the sort of high brow snobbery that is typical of someone who has never walked a mile in their shoes, it is a collectivist worldview of the worst sort, 'the ends justify the means,' right? Well, to every individual who is personally affected by rape, murder via terrorism, robbery, assault and battery, and any number of other crimes which make the average citizen fear for their security (real or perceived) it DOES mean something. Those people who are victims, have their lives irrevocably changed. The chief duty of a country is to care for its citizens and their safety first, secondary or maybe even tertiary to that would be this humanitarian save the whales tripe that you've been spouting.

Whats your sides response when these people voice legitimate grievances and concerns regarding the influx of people who are culturally and linguistically dissimilar to them? To shout them down and brow beat them with labels of racism, xenophobia, islamophobia, and whatever other popular -ism you can attach to them, meant ONLY to stifle dissent and silence their opinion. Once someone is labeled a 'bigot,' we don't engage with them right, we don't debate with the opinions of bigots, so the message is quite clear, to de-legitimize their opinion. Whats worse is that when some of these people choose not to adhere to the prevailing dogma and groupthink, your sides reaction is to HURT them, they should be publicly shamed and lose their job, they should be blacklisted in their respective industry so that they can no longer provide for their family because they thought the wrong things or dared to question the prevailing dogma surrounding immigration. This is 1950s McCarthyism all over again with the Red Scare, only this time it's in support of a new left wing grand social experiment that requires absolute fealty.

I find your response to be dismissive and morally repugnant, typical of people on the left who believe they're a new enlightened class.

Another banal post post unrelated to the questionable original post in the thread. Very interesting that you pretend not to know the difference between extreme right-wing propaganda and 'actual evidence'.

Even more telling that you start off-topic ranting on (from afar) about immigration in a thread that isn't about it at all...

No matter how much you whine and whinge, the political situation in Germany hasn't gone the way you want it :-D

how so? the migrant issue is one of the most salient for some of Germany's neighbors and the German reluctance to admit what an effin' disaster it's been does not bode well for their relations with other countries...

And if Schulz gets anywhere near a leadership he'll for sure alienate the former eastern bloc.

To some degree the EU is a good thing, but it's clear that enough citizens don't want further integration that pursuing it at all costs is objectively terrible policy.

There is a thread to discuss that very issue.

Sorry Jon, I didn't know the Brottsförebyggande rådet (Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention) qualified as extreme right-wing propaganda. I'll try to get more acceptable sources next time.

It does when you start posting stuff out of context on an online forum. Off-topic too...

I hate to dignify the 'off-topic' response, because that seems to be the default here when losing an argument. The relevance is perfectly clear with regards to "what it means for Poland," as the Poles can look to the official bodies in Germany and Sweden to see how insecurity rises in tandem with increased immigration from specific immigrant populations. The aforementioned are statistical facts, they don't morph into right-wing propaganda because they disprove your world view. There was nothing out of context about the statistics from BROT, the Swedes did not wake up one day and decide to go on an orgy of rape and murder. The Poles have simply decided to reject this same calamity befalling their population, and have instead decided to take 1.2 million Ukrainians, and they have not had terrorist attacks, mass rape, or increased murder and gang violence. Fact mate.

There's no argument on my part - people were discussing internal party matters in Germany, and you started banging on about an increase in crime reports in Sweden to fit your obsession with immigration from certain parts of the world. So yes, off topic.

Not everything revolves around immigration, and in any case it happens, it will continue to happen, and will increase - no matter how that upsets individuals like yourself.

Fair enough. Regarding internal politics of Germany, I would say that Martin Schulz is hell bent on dominating Europe and he loathes the idea of nation-states and national sovereignty, and therefore he is a danger and existential threat to freedom loving people across Europe. What say you?

Essentially yes, he's a technocrat without the slightest understanding of human naure, combine him with the soft-hearted soft-headed impulsive Merkel and who knows what new disasters they'll cook up for Europeans...

I don't think he's 'hell-bent' on anything; moderates rarely are. The concept of the nation state has largely been bad for Germany and Europe - in fact for most of German history they were a patchwork of fiefdoms.

The concept of the nation state is inextricably bound up with ideas like public education and the welfare state and elections and citizen sovreignty over the government. There are some very big negatives but the post nation state reality certainly doesn't seem to ameliorate those and represents huge steps backward in areas like citizen representation - elections in many European countries are now essentially meaningless as they have no effect on policy (see Greece) similarly citizen protest is no longer effective much of anywhere... los indignados, #occupy, the pvssy marches, pro-democracy marches in Poland or anti-corruption marches in Romania... none of them make a bit of difference in terms of policy.

Don't be so happy to see the nation state go away, its passing will surely create a lot more losers than winners.

He is a commie hence by the definition he is not moderate but a dangerous fanatic and an extremist who has no power to go for it. If he would have such a power you would see what moderate he is - like Stalin.

A small town bookshop owner (though maybe his shelves were packed with Trotsky and Gramsci). A promising footballer, former alcoholic, then a moderate mayor of a small town before being elected many times for parliament. Speaks English and French. Not really a commie fanatic bent on German domination of Europe.

Not especially old, and doesn't suit everywhere - in a lot of the world, state borders are a straight line on a map, drawn regardless of the inhabitants. It doesn't always suit modern factors like increasing migration and a shrinking world either.

Germany did very well for centuries without it.


About as far from that as it gets, isn't he. One of the good guys.

Female suffrage is not especially, old that doesn't make it bad.


And Poland did effin' terribly without it, Poland having completely open borders did not work out very well.

One of the things that deranged ideologues like Schulz doesn't understand is that what works for one country doesn't necessarily work for another.

@cms

Ok, and Che Guevara was a physician so what is the conclusion I'm supposed to draw from Schulz's humble beginnings? That shop keepers are precluded from becoming power deranged maniacs?

@jon357

Honestly, I really want to try to understand the mindset of people who think like you, and I mean that genuinely. I would ask you a bit more directly, but I sense that it would be nothing but condescension and snide remarks. It would probably make things much more if left-wingers would just say "We think we are smarter than you, that the decisions you make are wrong, we are the enlightened class and you need to be told whats best for you." That is the message I take away from just about every one of your posts, and I'd wager that we have similar levels of education and income.