Tag Archives: politics

What is going on in Germany? About politics, immigrants, a fading democracy and a changing nation

German winter landscape

There is, of course, no single correct interpretation of what is going on in Germany today. It all depends on your point of view. What, however, is clear beyond much doubt is that there is a divide between the published opinion of the people, and that what a majority of citizens are actually thinking. That is a problem, because it badly undermines democracy. It also leads to people in other countries assuming incorrect things about German views on the so-called ‘refugee crisis’.

I work as a general practitioner in medicine, and thus have contact with many people from many different groups of society. These people speak their minds to me in a way they otherwise might not. As a general rule, Germans are mostly uneasy about openly voicing their opinions, at least when their views do not coincide with the official mainstream. They have been brought up this way by politics, by the media, by schools and universities. In some way, it is the consequence of German history. In the aftermath of the terrible fascist regime, a moral system of control and self-control was imposed in the years after the war, and understandably so, and it continues to exist right to the present day.

But its roots go further back than that, perhaps right to the time when reformist Martin Luther openly supported the murderous suppression of uprising peasants. What these people had done at that time was basically demand democratic participation. Unfortunately, most of them were killed by those in power, which probably left its scars on society. Centuries later, in the time of the cold war, ideals of open participation were, at least in the Western part of the country, supposedly held high by a vocal youth and an academic elite, but this was not that difficult in a thriving post-war-economy and as a welcomed showcase for opposing a totalitarian Eastern Bloc.

Today, as a follow-up to all that, everything is about being politically correct. Unfortunately, this is basically also an easy way for discarding and thus oppressing those parts of public opinion which might otherwise harm the economic interests of the super rich. Germany has become a post-democratic country, and many people feel exactly that way. Those that say it out loudly and openly are ridiculed and pressurised by those who otherwise advocate tolerance, and it is happening daily in public and private media and on the internet, probably more so than in other free Western countries.

What people really feel

From my own observations, far more than half of the population are not only critical, but fearful and angry about the millions of immigrants, or refugees, if you adopt the official diction, that are right now crossing the basically unguarded borders into the EU and into Germany, while the politicians they voted for refrain from intervening, or even just listening, in any meaningful way.

We are talking about more than a million people, each year, just coming to Germany. This has already been happening for years regarding those immigrating from other EU-countries, including countries once belonging to the Eastern Bloc, which usually offer far lower salaries than Germany, but that is a slightly different matter, with many cultural roots quite closely intertwined. Still, even then no German was ever asked for his opinion on this important matter. I wonder why.

But now, people are coming from countries economically and culturally far more removed than ever before. Most of these people have no plans of ever going back, and many will in the near future legally fetch several of their family members, thus leading to a probable number of new inhabitants of more than ten million, in the next five years alone. Thanks to the miracle of procreation, these numbers will only explode upwards from there. Germany, already one of the most densely populated countries in the world, has about eighty million inhabitants, but many of these are old age pensioners. The number of people working and thus actually enhancing the gross domestic product is far lower.

When it comes to the new immigrants, these are overwhelmingly people below the age of forty. But most of them have almost no education according to any Western standard, and thus it will be a basically unsolvable challenge of putting all these people into meaningful work in an economy with already millions of unemployed.

The largest group of those already now taking the biggest share out of the social systems are the immigrants of yesterday, and their children. This is a fact, even if an uncomfortable one. On the whole, the immigrants of today and tomorrow will be costing the working people in Germany more money in the next few decades than they will ever be able to give back. Still, they are very useful for some, and that is important to understand.

Who is profiting

For one, all these new people need a place in which they can live. They need food, they need clothes and they need medicine. Do you get my drift? The rich people who make, or own, or somehow offer this are making a hell of a buck, right now, and increasingly so. It’s a huge industry, and because it can claim it is doing something good, it is very hard to criticise openly. I wouldn’t even say this is primarily benefiting rich Germans. It’s just rich people, wherever they live, somehow invested in companies that are holding out their hands for taxpayers money to get these people looked after.

Of course, quite a few of the immigrants will work, and they will work hard. They will also work for very little money, which will lead to everyone else who does not want to work for the same meagre salary in not getting a job at all, at least if they’re not vastly more qualified.

So you could say, the really rich are one group of people who actually rather welcome what is going on, but only because they can afford to live in exclusive communities, send their children to expensive private schools and basically have more money than they could ever need to alleviate the problems arising from an unequal society. Sounds like the United States of America? Well, what a surprise.

You know, it’s important to realise that Germany, like many other countries in Western Europe, was only a very few decades ago one of the most equal, fair and caring societies in the world. Back then, when we still had the Deutschmark and thus control over our own currency, a large number of people could get along on one salary alone, and could still afford to have kids, a house and go on holidays several times a year. Cities were full of people actually speaking the same language and sharing the same culture.

All that has changed. It’s not that the Germans ever were the kindest people in the world. They were ambitious and clever, and that is something that many people in the world admired. Still, Germans also tended to push forwards in queues and were never able to laugh about themselves very well. You could say they were always afraid of being left out and not getting their share of whatever. The thing is, now they really have every right to feel exactly that way.

The rise of neoliberalism

It all started about two decades ago, as neoliberalism began to sweep over the country in the aftermath of German reunification. State funds were being spent in huge amounts on getting the East of Germany up to standards, but rather than strengthening the local economy, mostly some big West German companies were profiting. What was still left of the productive industry was sold for a pittance. In the whole of Germany, former state companies and infrastructure were getting privatised at an enormous speed, but the tax-financed investments of earlier days for a long time kept many things running like a clockwork.

Some years later, the Euro came to replace the Deutschmark, and with it, mostly unnoticed, Germany lost control of its core financial levers. Then, politics and lobbyists hand in hand paved the way for a deregulation of the labour markets, of insurances and of financial services, on a big scale. Great amounts of savings landed in the private pockets of a few people, usually offering little security in return. And then, oh so surprisingly, the so-called ‘financial crisis’ came, and politics decided on saving basically worthless banks with taxpayers’ money. And now, what started to go bad some years before is getting worse in the way of totally uncontrolled immigration.

Unless, of course, you ask one of the German ideologists. I would put these at about twenty per cent of German society, but what these people say is greatly amplified, and today more than ever. There are two reasons for this. For one, the rich people, who are basically making loads of money with what is going on, own most of the media, which is of course the same as everywhere else. They can thus decide who gets heard and who doesn’t.

Secondly, public media, state schools, state universities and political parties are basically cramped with left-winged opportunist ideologists, partly as a consequence of those vocal people from the post-war decades having made it to comfortable, tax-paid jobs later in their lives. I know this sounds harsh, but it pretty much is the best way to put it, and all else would be mincing words. For these ideologists, the agenda is all about equality, but in a very small-minded, old-communist-party style way, with a fair amount of petit-bourgeois envy as the icing on-top.

Ideologists and their agenda

For many of these ideologists today, the most important issues are things like introducing the symbols _ and * into the German language, in order to even out all those bad anti-feminist words that have been evilly suppressing so many for so long. Or putting up little plastic fences at the side of roads, so that frogs don’t get run over. Or returning beautiful English style parks to their ‘natural’ state by flooding them with water, so that rare birds can thrive there. Or in general, to just be extremely self-referential. Basically, it’s all the things that rich people in their parallel worlds don’t give a toss about, as the middle classes are carrying the costs of these basically self-serving people.

And of course, as these ideologists are so overwhelmingly good people, they are also overwhelmingly pro-immigration, without any kind of filter, selection or limit. A few of them actually are quite immaterialist, and quite a few have very little feeling for the culture and heritage they are living in, so for these there truly is no real impact they need to fear. Many of them don’t even really like the Germans, and thus they think: the less, the better.

And many of them, often being more idealistic than productive, are in their ways already accustomed to living off salaries that somehow magically come from the state. So these people don’t really have much of a moral problem with others also sharing a cake that they themselves didn’t bake. That is, at least as long as their own cake doesn’t get smaller. The thing is, it will in many cases, but many haven’t figured that one out yet, or they are in the happy situation of making sure that savings are made elsewhere, and not on their own front porch, this basically being the case for all politicians in Berlin and Brussels, and for all of their families, too. And then there is that thing called envy, but many less well off ideologists would never openly acknowledge or probably even realise it exists. Basically, if they can’t have the bourgeois life, why should those elsewhere in the middle class?

Imagine all the people

But most of all, for these twenty per cent of German society, it is about the unifying dream that all people can both closely and peacefully live together, even if they are totally different ethnically, culturally, in their religion, their heritage, and in their respect and tolerance of other people. The trouble is, the opposite has always proven to be the case, and it probably always will. Birds of a feather flock together, and differences separate.

Even in a country like the USA, which is united by the agenda-setting of its overwhelming media consumption, its throw-away materialism and its pro-Americanism that is implanted from an early age onwards, this dream is only partially working in reality, and harsh divides cut through classes and nationalities, especially in the less affluent parts of society. Europe is so much different again, as it thrives by consisting of nations with very unique mentalities and cultures, but with a strong unification in moral and ethical values that have evolved over many centuries, even millenniums, basically rooted in the values of Christianity and the Roman way of life.

History has never shown that the dream of homogenous heterogeneity in a close space is a viable one, and it has lastly always lead to segregation, to parallel societies, and in some cases, to civil wars. Most people are egoistic, and in the end, it always boils down to Darwinism. The greater the differences, the greater the tensions. The fact is, the fittest and the most ruthless survive, gathering those culturally similar to themselves around them, with the cleverest at the top and the more aggressive and easy to manipulate somewhere below. With an unprecedented amount of immigration from people culturally as far apart as imaginable, all of what the European post-war Western societies had thought they had left behind will be coming back, and with a vengeance.

Now, please do understand me on this. I know that these are my personal opinions. Many people think differently about these things, but many, and I would say most, also think similarly to how I do. What a democracy needs is to fulfil two basic requirements: It must give people the ability to speak openly about what they think, while giving others the possibility to hear these opinions in an unbiased manner. And it must give people the ability to participate in converting these opinions to actual, meaningful decisions.

Let’s talk democracy

Both of these requirements are not being met in Germany today, at all. People cannot openly voice their concerns, and people are not allowed to vote on important choices concerning their own future. Germans did not vote on the introduction of the Euro, or on the saving of banks with their own money, or on the continuing privatisation of state assets, or on the constant enlargement of the EU towards the former Eastern Bloc, or on the uncontrolled influx of millions of immigrants from countries outside the EU. With such disregard for the opinions of the people, it is hard to feel Germany is still close to the ideal of a true democracy. Perhaps it never was, but it has never seemed less like that than today.

So what is going on in Germany? Well, if you ask me, Germany is heading towards a bleak future. On the outside, and much more so under the surface, it has changed considerably, and it is continuing to change, irreversibly, and for the worse. More people will start to voice their criticism, which will lead to more suppression of opinion. German culture, whatever that is, definitely its heritage, but probably most of all its equality and its freedom, will start to recede in the wake of a new, totalitarian and privatised type of politics, left and ideological on the outside, and brutally neoliberal on the inside.

What once defined Germany, its art and philosophy, its basis of values, and a once strong middle class, will slowly be swept away by corporate unification, materialism and consumerism, much as in other parts of this previously more diverse and more equal continent. In many ways, for Germany, and perhaps for the whole of Europe, the best times very probably lie in the past.

My views in German: http://nicht-mehr-mein-deutschland.de


On the Germans, and the strange alliance between left and right

I must get this one off my mind. It is about us Germans. My observation as a half-German, half-English, is that many Germans posses a certain mixture of characteristics that can be conflicting and, I feel, at times dangerous. I believe it is the force of history, of a century-long socialisation that has worked its way into both the rules of this particular society and into the genetic makeup of its people.

It is strange. On the one hand, Germany is seen as and in many cases is the country of poets and thinkers, of technicians and inventors, of exactness and accountability. Of course, these characteristics are spread unevenly across the country, and the people in the middle and South are generally seen as a bit more enterprising and cultured, perhaps because their ancestors were more influenced by Roman settlement all those millenniums ago.

Nevertheless, a relaxed lifestyle or the appreciation of self-humouring lightness are traits not usually associated with most Germans. Instead, there seems to be a certain essence of character pervading here more than in other European people. It can perhaps best be described as a canalised fear and envy of those unreachable and more powerful, which expresses itself in subliminal negative emotions against those who can be reached, in a fear of always getting a little too little of the cake, of somehow being left out and thus not wanting others to have more than oneself.

Of course, this is a great drive for striving to be at the top, for having the biggest car or whatever maximum symbol you can achieve, and thus it undoubtedly furthers economic success. But it is a polarising trait that can be misused, and it has been frequently. Tell the already discontent post-first-world-war little man on the street that above all the blame lies on bankers of a certain religion, and you can find a veritable drive for fascism. Tell the little man that it is the academics who are rising above them, and you have a good basis for a police state. All this happened.

The thing is, as these traits are not bound to a certain political direction, you will find them in people of left and right convictions alike. Reducing, while trying to keep to the point, the characteristics in the left seem more connected with a kind of naïve idealism and a socialist approach, whereas in the right they appear more associated with self-interest and an individualist approach. In Germany, at least, this has led to an interesting constellation.

In many cases in which a general discussion among people of all political wings would help to preserve civil peace but at the same time would hinder the personal gain of a few, the politically right have understood to instrumentalise the politically left for their own good.

The ingredients are simple: Take your personal gain agenda, mix it with an emotionalised social sounding theme and feed it to a left-wing idealist of about average intelligence, who is in addition primed with the deep engrained feeling of guilt that only Germans know. Then sit back or get on with your life. The funny thing is, the left, who more than anything dislike the right, can’t seem to gather what is happening.

And so it goes from there: Talk about the control of immigration in Germany, and you are labelled a semi-fascist. Talk about the reasons for the enlargement of the European Union, and the same happens. Talk about the introduction of the Euro, the treaty of Lisbon, in fact about anything where a few people profit financially in a big way and many only in an idealist way, and you can only lose in Germany.

Troubling events scarred the history of this country. Once upon a time, peasants started to rise against aristocracy. With the support of such good-intending reformers as Martin Luther, they were brutally suppressed and killed off in the tens of thousands. The peasants never rose again, ever.

You could think that today hope would at least lie with the German middle classes. But conformed by media and fearing for the loss of a dwindling status-quo, the middle class seems more than ever defined by materialism, and less than ever by culture. That is dangerous, because it removes the basis for a society grounded on moral values.

I do not think Germans are better or worse people than others. The Romans conquered and killed, the English ransacked during their colonialism, the United States with their neo-imperialism are today wrecking the lives of many in the middle East, and Muslim terrorists are slaughtering without regard for anything much. What I believe, though, is that too many Germans possess a combination of resentment and persistence that can, and I fear will again, be harvested by those clever, manipulating and ruthless enough to do so.

We will see what the future will bring. History usually is a good indicator.

Such a nice picture for such a serious subject

Such a nice picture for such a serious subject

Is Germany a corrupt country?

Wikipedia defines corruption as ‘spiritual or moral impurity or deviation from an ideal’. It continues, stating ‘political corruption occurs, when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts in an official capacity for his or her own personal gain’.

It is difficult, that one. Fact is, in Germany, people in politics are constantly changing into the private sector and people working in the private sector are constantly, at least for a time, changing into politics or a closely connected part of the public sector. They call it the revolving door, and though I assume that most of the change occurs for the enhancement of personal gain in the form of money or influence, that is only part of the problem.

In Germany, since at least the late 1990s, privately financed lobbyists from the media, from insurance companies and banks, from the car industry, the chemical industry and the weapons industry have been openly assisting ministries in drafting new laws. These laws are subsequently usually slanting towards the advantage of the private sector. If you ask me, that really is a problem. After all, democracy should primarily be about representing the interests of the voter, and not of those people who scratch your back. From all I can gather, things are even worse on a European level, because there is even less accountability towards the citizen there.

Adding to that, Germany is one of the few countries in the world in which parliamentarians may, without fearing punishment, receive money from pretty much anyone, as long as it is not directly connected to casting a vote. There was a mostly unanimous opinion among politicians against changing those rules, and it was argued that it would otherwise unnecessarily stifle politicians in their decision making.

The situation elsewhere is comparable. For all I know, many former employees of one of the world’s biggest investment banks are active in high-up US-politics. And coming to that, they are pretty active in the rest of the world, too. It is much the same in Britain, where Westminster and the City seem uncomfortably close. The argument for the revolving door will always be a similar one. These people are experts at what they do. Which undoubtedly is true. The question is, what exactly do they do, and in whose interest?

So can all this be called corruption, or at least corruptibility? When there is such great closeness between politicians, industrialists, journalists, consultants and lobbyists, with many openly displaying glowing friendships in the media, never mind covertly on the golf course, what in all honesty should you call it?

There is no easy answer. Friendships, relations and networks are a part of life, and more so in politics, I would guess. And even if this would amount to corruption, were it alright to call it so and thus the enabling system with it? According to paragraph 90a of the German ‘Strafgesetzbuch’, anyone who ‘abuses or maliciously defames Germany or its constitutional system is punishable by up to three years in prison’. While I am not doing anything of the kind, it does make me think about free speech. It shows that freedom is always a relative thing, which I guess must be in the nature of the matter.

Which brings me back to corruption. Germany has a great constitution, written by insightful people after a devastating war. The question is, is that constitution being respected today?

Light and shadow make up the world, and the world of politics, too

Light and shadow make up the world, and the world of politics, too

On Thatcher, Blair, Schröder and Merkel

I had promised myself not to get too political on this blog, but the recent demise of Lady Thatcher has me wanting to just get a few thoughts off my mind, to whom it may concern.

While many Germans know the name of Margaret Thatcher and her being described as ‘the Iron Lady’, this is about as far as the general grasp of English politics of the last 30 years goes for most. Today, Mrs Merkel, several generations of politicians behind Mrs Thatcher, enjoys a similar standing in the rest of Europe or even the world. Not totally undeserved, I think. But the picture goes deeper, and it has a twist.

When Mrs Thatcher of the Conservative Party came to be Prime Minister, the power of the British labour unions was incredibly strong, you could say overpowering. At the same time, the economy was not doing especially well. So Thatcher killed the unions, privatised everything and introduced neoliberalism into the UK. Everyone was forthwith responsible for their own well-being. Which sounded great, and worked fine for those enterprising enough or already having something to call their own, and perhaps for those who bought and sold their council houses at the right time, but that is another story. Then came John Major, again Conservative, whom I guess no one will remember, and then Tony Blair, Labour, and both basically continued what Thatcher had started. Though Blair made it sound nicer and somehow more enlightening, not least by calling his party New Labour.

In Germany, before chancellor Gerhard Schröder came to power to succeed an ageing Helmut Kohl of the German Conservative Party CDU, things looked a bit different. Germany was basically doing fine. The Germans weren’t liked in the world, but they were respected. Back then, Germany was more of a welfare state than most countries. Thing was, there were some big clouds on the horizon. Most of all, the debts of German reunification were mounting up.

In addition, the great and uncontrolled flow of immigrants in the 50s, 60s and 70s, mostly from Turkey, and at the time basically demanded by a thriving German industry of the post-war era, did for some reason not plan on going home. Around the same time, and this perhaps accelerated by the arrival of private television, an increasing number of people had got used to comfortably using the welfare system to their own good. More than anyone, the people at the top of the food chain in Germany did not like this, as it was the taxes they weren’t paying that were being spent on a growing precariat. And their prayers were answered with the advent of Gerhard Schröder of the German Labour Party SPD, which wasn’t called New Labour, but could have been.

Following Schröder’s Agenda 2010, low wage employment was created. The industry thanked him, and with lots of advertising it helped convince many of the middle class and most of the petit bourgeois that all this was good and right. At the same time, the long beforehand planned expansion of the European Union towards the East brought in millions of cheap workers and made using cheap labour directly in other European countries a trifle. Meanwhile, the introduction of the Euro forced true wages down and made exports more profitable. The industry thanked again. Back then, it wasn’t clear to the broader public that with losing the Deutschmark, you had also lost the right to print your own money.  Next, the rules on banking were relaxed with the help of such people as Jörg Asmussen. Now it was the banks that thanked. Then, some pension schemes were privatised, and the insurance companies thanked, making such people as Carsten Maschmeyer to semi-billionaires. Around that time, Maschmeyer’s friend chancellor Schröder lost the next election to Merkel of the German Conservative Party CDU. On election night he appeared on TV, almost behaving like a coke-head, so agitated was he at the loss of power. And so the era Merkel started.

Angela Merkel was raised and socialised in the former German Democratic Republic, the DDR, mostly characterised by not being especially democratic. She apparently was in some junior role responsible for a job titled ‘agitation and propaganda’, whatever that means. Not that people can’t change. In fact, changing, adapting and always turning with the wind is probably one of Merkel’s most defining characteristics. After ending the end of atomic power that the red-green government under Schröder had initiated, she once again ended the ending of the end after the reactor accident of Fukishima in Japan. Talk about being populist. Having studied physics and coming from a clerical background, these characteristics however were and are instead emphasised in the same media that helped her become chancellor.

And then, with the reactions to the so-called financial crisis changing the face of society all around the world, Merkel proclaimed the need for a market-conform democracy. I don’t know what that is, but it makes me shiver. Today, for some reason probably having to do with Germany agreeing to pay all future debts of Europe, all eyes are on Merkel, either as mother, godmother or stepmother. I wonder which turns out to be true.

Spreading your wings to catch the sun only works till it gets dark

Spreading your wings to catch the sun only works till it gets dark

On German media

My opinion of German media is not high. We have many privately owned newspapers, magazines, television channels and radio stations, but when you do a bit of fact checking, it basically boils down to a few huge conglomerates dominating public opinion and thus politics. First and foremost there is Bertelsmann, now owned by former secretary and mistress gone widow Liz Mohn, and there is Springer, now owned by former child-minding mistress gone widow Friede Springer. They are both befriended with German chancellor Angela Merkel, quelle surprise. Otherwise, and with perhaps a little less influence on the shaping of politics, we have Burda, Holtzbrinck, Madsack and Bauer, and that is about it on the private front.

Public media in the form of television, radio and internet coverage meanwhile has become a huge and expensive bureaucratic mess, too often trying to copy private media by mostly looking at how many people are watching and not at the quality of the content watched. Talk-shows full of lobbyists are everywhere, and the well-paid hosts are treated like omniscient priests. There are, however, some small special-interest channels like ZDFinfo or the German-French Arte that really offer superb, homegrown documentaries of all kinds. Then again, the public networks let themselves be forced by private industry to erase huge media archives once paid for by the tax payer, for reasons of unfair competition. In good German tradition, no resistance was heard. Go figure.

Often quoted on the magazine front is ‘der Spiegel’, once a superficial investigative left-wing magazine and since gone more or less neoliberal with more than a quarter of it owned by Bertelsmann, something few people realise. And then there is the public Deutschlandfunk radio, a pale soundscape next to the journalism the BBC produces. While the latter, at least when it isn’t pitching fluffy human interest stories, has features like ‘from our own correspondent’, the former has unresearched opinions put into pseudo-intellectual words, mixed with music nobody wants to hear, like it still were the Sixties.

So, all in all, my opinion of German media is not high. Coming to that, when I think of Berlusconi and Murdoch, neither is it of media in other countries.

Media at all times played a great part in the forming of opinions. This picturesque architecture stems from a time in Germany when public opinion in some parts was different, but not more informed.

Media at all times played a great part in the forming of opinions. This picturesque architecture stems from a time in Germany when public opinion in some parts was different, but not more informed.

The excellent BBC and their not-so-excellent generalisation on The Germans

I love to listen to the BBC via internet. I savour the World Service and Radio 4, especially the FM version, they are fun, well made and keep me up-to-date with high-quality journalism and a different view on the world.

Which gets me to where I was getting to. So often, the BBC journalists and moderators talk about ‘the Germans’ and ‘the German standpoint’. And I ask myself: What would ‘the English standpoint’ be in any situation? The opinion of the people? Which people, the rich, the poor? Or would it perhaps be the generally agreed position of the government?

Anyhow, much the same questions apply to Germany. A German right-winger would have a different opinion than a left-winger. One can easily blame most Germans for being pretty influenced by the media, as one could say of almost any nation, I guess, most certainly of the US-Americans, the Russians and the Italians. But it certainly is not so that all Germans agree with Angela Merkel. So when I hear what ‘the Germans’ want used synonymously with what Mrs Merkel thinks, I cringe slightly.

After all, dear BBC, wouldn’t that be the same with ‘the British’ and Mr Cameron?

I have honestly no idea what the Germans on this picture are thinking

I have honestly no idea what the Germans on this picture are thinking