RSS
As the disastrousness of Chancellor Merkel’s decision last August to invite in a million Muslim mob becomes ever more obvious, globalist grandees like George Soros and John McCain have been casting about for an opportunity to blame Vladimir Putin. But it’s increasingly clear that Dr. Merkel instead handed power to Putin’s Turkish counterpart and rival, Tayyip Erdogan. From the NYT:
Germany’s Merkel Criticized for Allowing Prosecution of Comedian Who Mocked Erdogan
By REUTERS APRIL 15, 2016, 12:48 P.M. E.D.T.BERLIN — Germany’s Angela Merkel agreed on Friday to allow prosecutors to pursue a case against a German comedian who mocked Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan, prompting accusations that she had failed to protect free speech and dividing her ruling coalition.
Erdogan had demanded that Germany press charges against Jan Boehmermann after he recited a poem about the Turkish leader in a show on German public broadcaster ZDF on March 31, suggesting he hits girls, watches child pornography and engages in bestiality.
A section of the German criminal code prohibits insults against foreign leaders but leaves it to the government to decide whether to authorize prosecutors to pursue such cases.
This is the 1871 law of imperial Germany against lèse-majesté toward foreign rulers.
This put Merkel in an awkward position. She has been the driving force behind a controversial European Union deal with Turkey to stem the flow of refugees into Europe and critics have already accused her of ignoring violations of human rights and press freedoms in Turkey to secure its cooperation.
The chancellor made clear in a statement that the decision to allow prosecutors to investigate was not a verdict on the merits of the case itself.
But she came under fire from the Social Democrats (SPD), her center-left coalition partner, which had wanted the Turkish request to be rejected. With her cabinet split on the matter, Merkel had the casting vote. …
Presenting her decision in a televised statement, Merkel said: “Turkey is a country with which Germany has close and friendly ties.”…
Kai Diekmann, publisher of Germany’s mass-selling daily newspaper Bild, responded with a commentary under the headline “In Erdogan’s Hand” in which he asked: “Has Germany, with the Turkey deal, made itself susceptible to blackmail?”
Diekmann added: “When (the chancellor) travels to Turkey next week, she must say to her host’s face how terrible things are in Turkey with freedom of opinion and of the press.”
Merkel travels to Turkey with top EU officials on April 23.
Sahra Wagenknecht, of the far-left Linke party, accused Merkel of kowtowing to the “Turkish despot” Erdogan. …
In giving her statement, Merkel pressed Turkey — a candidate for European Union membership — to uphold the values of freedom of expression, the press and art.
She also made reference to the three million people with Turkish roots who live in Germany, the strong economic ties between the countries and their cooperation as NATO allies.
Turkey’s not a bad country; Erdogan isn’t the worst strongman in the world. But is there anything in history dumber than the German Chancellor, at the apogee of Federal Republic of Germany’s power, deciding to pursue a strategy that, in effect, gives the whip hand over her nation to a dodgy Turkish Islamist politician? Germany’s GDP is 4.3 times Turkey’s GDP, so why is Turkey suddenly in charge?
This was a world-historical own goal that Ms. Merkel committed last summer, and we need to have a frank conversation about what’s wrong with the zeitgeist that made it seem like a good idea at the time.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
I’m telling ya, Anga is positioning herself as a post-government global influencer, like Clinton and Blair. Schroeder tried, but had pissed off the neocons too severely by not going along with Operation: Pandora’s Box back in 2003. Still, even he’s made a lot of money in Putin’s Russia..
Now that Merkel realises that’s she’s sparked a revolutionary situation across Europe, she’s desperate to placate Erdogan. He controls the spigot on this flow of detritus from Inner Asia, after all.
As a student of European history, I know for a mortal fact that this will not end pleasantly.
Merkel is simply the worst Chancellor in German history. Yeah, i know that's supposed to be a high unreachable bar. But it's not.
Hitler merely killed a *lot* of people. An utter disaster for *individuals*, millions dead, incredible pain and suffering. But at the end of it ... Europe was still there. Russia, Poland with millions dead ... still there. Even Germany was still there. Borders moved a bit but Germany was still Germany. Even the Jews, who Hitler had mass murdered by the millions with genocidal intent--still had their race intact and actually were motivated to go create their own nation. Come say 1950, Europe was intact and recovering, all its races and nations intact--if some under the thumb of the Soviets. Again immense *individual* pain, suffering and death ... but races and cultures and nations intact.
Merkel in *one year* has permanently altered--screwed up--Germany. When assessing the damage forget about Germany's nominal "80 million". What matters is reproduction. These refugees are mostly young reproductive age and overwhelmingly male. They'll either later bring in matching young women or impregnate German women, squeezing out German men. Germany has only about 5 million men in their 20s. Cohorts behind in the teens are even smaller. But let's be generous and say Germany's current "coming into breeding" generation has about 10m men.
Realistically Merkel has already introduced a 10% foreign element--and she's not done. Even if people are fed up and get rid of her and close the border later this year ... she'll have replaced 20% of Germany's population with a foreign, culturally alien, hostile population. And one that will reproduce *faster* than Germans. She's done to Germany, something actually greater in magnitude and effect to what African slavery did to the US--and in one year! For *no purpose*!
People just have their heads in the sand on how incredibly terrible this is, how incredibly evil our "elites" are. The future of the West is being destroyed right in front of our eyes. Even Hitler could not accomplish such destruction.Replies: @Peter Akuleyev, @Anon 2
Countries that have genuinely friendly, or at least non-adversarial relations, with each other have no need for laws like these. George W. Bush was relentlessly parodied, criticized and made fun of in foreign countries and no one thought to prosecute the comediens. If a statement was made that defames Erdogan personally, the civil courts of Germany are open to him. This type of a law might be useful only for countries on the ragged edge of war, where a personal insult might push an adversary over the edge, but a prosecution could defuse things until diplomacy resolves the underlying conflict or war begins (at which point insulting the enemy leader is encouraged). Perceived personal insults were a part of the chain of events leading up to the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, although I don’t remember the precise circumstances–I think that Bismarck edited a French diplomatic communication to make it appear more insulting to the King of Prussia than it actually was intended to be.
A frank conversation about the Zeitgeist? Probably not–the inability to have such a conversation is an essential part of the Zeitgeist. The rot in western Europe, the U.S. and Canada goes so deep that probably only a cataclysm will change it.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bismarcked
I blame his dad, thwarted ambition, unrequited love turns to hate and all that
"Fenerbahçe wanted him to transfer to the club but his father prevented it".
Just think, we could have been watching him being turned inside out on a wet November night by Terry Neill's boys instead. And he'd have been lovin' every minute of it.
I think it has less to do with the large Turko-German population than with fear of an annoyed Turkey dumping more migrants on Germany–they pass through Turkey from what I understand. But I’ll defer to the German reader on this one..?
Of course all this totally ignores the situation in Libya/Italy which is likely to get nasty in the coming weeks.
Am I the only one noticing how petty this makes Erdogan look? Throwing a tantrum over what some B-list comedian said about him in a country 1,000 miles away? I simply can’t imagine being the dictator of a major country and getting upset over what civilians in other countries say about me. What a pitiful child Erdogan is.
The bigger question is how the German constitutional democracy has allowed one person to have such unfettered power. That of course is connected with your question of “what’s wrong with the zeitgeist […]”.
This “comedian” is a complete fool. Edrogan is an integral ally in helping with the refugee crisis. Without his help the situation could become disastrous.
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men like the “comedian”
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men"
Key terms:
crisis (never let a good one go to waste)
words have consequences (speak honestly, White man, and your life will be destroyed)
diverse (non-White = good)
things should be off limits (any disagreement with the Rainbow left is forbidden)
code for hate speech (any disagreement with the Rainbow left is hate)
privileged white men (anti-White, anti-man hatred)
This is all too pat. I smell a troll.
Her decisions have been awful. Is she ill? On medications? Has she become a drinker? Been having ministrokes? What the devil has happened to her?
Steve Sailer is not authorized to determine the subjects about which “we need to have a frank conversation about what’s wrong”.
His presumption is wrong on many levels.
Foremost, we need to keep focusing on society’s need to have frank conversations about the racism of people who are not Democrats.
OT:
The riots may be over (for now), but life in Ferguson remains , ahem, interesting (mildly NSFW)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=47d_1460773334
Merkel is Erdogan’s eager and compliant bitch. “Bend over!” “Jawohl Mein Herr”.
“Germany’s GDP is 4.3 times Turkey’s GDP, so why is Turkey suddenly in charge?”
Germany’s GDP also surpasses that of all of Africa, so why are Africans from Eritrea, Sudan, Somalia, etc., deciding what the EU’s immigration policies will be?
“Europe doesn’t have the money to deal with the problem” is a crock. 2,000,000 invaders times $4,000 each to return them (an excessively high estimate) = $8 billion. That’s far less than Germany will spend resettling them. It would cost virtually nothing to put them all on boats and set the invaders down on the shores of some failed state like Libya. The Libyans couldn’t stop them.
Turkey is in charge because Merkel and her Davos friends want them to be in charge.
The major of a large German city told residents, who were protesting a refugee center in their suburb, that each refugee costs the city min. EUR 2000/month just for food and shelter, excluding the security, bureaucratic and medical expenses. With 2 million, that mounts to min. EUR 48 billion/year. But they cry they don't have enough money to send them back. What a blatant lie. Instead they want more, so their math is that importing more refugees somehow works out cheaper than staving off the surge and repatriating. Obviously its just a lie to dumb down ordinary Europeans, whose future is being willfully fucked up the EU elite and other nefarious operators such as Soros.
Never put childless women in charge of anything.
I just completed a Istanbul-Dubai-Tehran trip. I must say that Erdogan has really lost out to the Ayatollahs in the ME itself; so makes sense he would try to claw gains out of Merkel..
Don’t get involved in the Near East/Balkans is a pretty good rule of thumb I think..
Merkel is totally overrated. She basically screwed up every major policy issue in which her initiative was required (Energy reform, Eurocrisis, Greek crisis, refugees, banking crisis, Ukraine, Syria). Apart from that she lived off the labor-market reforms instituted by Schröder, an industry which was humming along, the credit expansion of the early EU years, and a fawning media landscape.
Now that issues are becoming trickier, and require initiative and even force, she flails and intuitively places herself and the country into potential blackmail situations, be it the ECB, the banks, Greece or now the refugee issue and Turkey.
There are nefarious issues such as her rumored Stasi activities, her ancestry and true religious loyalty (Bnei Brith masonry), but apart from that the media have been hyping her as an example of powerful female leadership. Many career women, riding the quota bus, were buying into this. But now her sheer incompetence and cowardice is becoming an embarrassment and security risk for ordinary Germans and Europeans, many of whom are disgusted with this woman.
I concur with that. The refugee situation is willful.
The major of a large German city told residents, who were protesting a refugee center in their suburb, that each refugee costs the city min. EUR 2000/month just for food and shelter, excluding the security, bureaucratic and medical expenses. With 2 million, that mounts to min. EUR 48 billion/year. But they cry they don’t have enough money to send them back. What a blatant lie. Instead they want more, so their math is that importing more refugees somehow works out cheaper than staving off the surge and repatriating. Obviously its just a lie to dumb down ordinary Europeans, whose future is being willfully fucked up the EU elite and other nefarious operators such as Soros.
The Germans have never embraced freedom, they will willingly submit to their Islamic masters. We will see an Islamic State in Germany before France capitulates. Any nation which jails comedians for mocking a foreigner cannot long exist in this world. The muslim infiltrators will use the German laws to persecute christians, while the leftists cheer them on. While the germans lock up grandmothers who are politically incorrect, they allow their daughters to be raped by the muslims they graciously invited to their nation. Trump is correct to abandon NATA, these people have lost the right to our protection.
Angela Merkel as The Great Dictator
Many Germans feel this way. What’s becoming even more obvious is that Merkel has a hard time admitting she made a mistake. That’s a very German trait, but I think especially powerful women fail in this area, since they regard admittance of failure as a sign of weakness, which has always been the argument against letting women run important public offices. Leadership weakness is especially frowned upon in Germany.
Merkel was not able to admit that inviting the world was a bad idea, and in order to fix it along back channels, as a last resort after the EU solution failed, she tried to make a deal with Erdogan, who was one of the prime instigators of this situation. Of course that could only go south, but it shows how desperate she was. Now she got into the next mess, and again is not able to admit her mistake, so she passes the buck onto the courts, which she otherwise does not take particularly seriously.
The media has been a foul weapon in the hands of operators such as Erdogan, Soros and the immigration lobby.
Merkel’s excuse about this being out of deference to the Turks in Germany sounded odd to me as well.
(I’m not in Germany but I’ll do my best here…) Although Turks in Germany are negatively selected from Turkey (having lower than Turkish average skills or education) and come from regions where Erdoğan gets high levels of support, I just can’t imagine more than 10% actually supporting the guy. The first generation went to Germany when Kemalist secularism was widely accepted, so they might be fairly embarrassed by Erdoğan. The second generation, while not, from what I’ve seen, especially well integrated, does live in Germany after all and have not been exposed to what makes Erdoğan popular with the majority in Turkey these days.
Erdoğan is the poor man’s Putin, for sure. But while Putin is nationalist, Erdoğan is more transnational, Ottoman Islamist. Nationalist Turks seem to be turned off by him, but with these latest victories in humiliating the feckless Euros, maybe they can picture themselves getting behind him.
His presumption is wrong on many levels.
Foremost, we need to keep focusing on society's need to have frank conversations about the racism of people who are not Democrats.Replies: @tris
yawn, at least when trolling, try to make it look less obvious.
I think of Merkel as the anti-Bismarck at this point in her career. She can’t put a foot right and doubles down on bad decisions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2QIZCvtzxAReplies: @Richard S
Oh wow, cool moniker! We should definitely form our own wee club 😉
Did Germans unleash war and destruction upon Europe for the 3rd time in century? Time will tell. Nevertheless, it has become incredibly difficult to not dislike the Cucked Germans.
Mekel is bringing Turkey into the EU as part of the deal, whereby 70 million Turks will have the legal right to come to any EU country they want.
As Brendan Simms notes “For centuries the Germans were at war with a shifting cast of hostile neighbours”. The single currency EU has kept Europe from war “Merkel never tires of repeating this mantra” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/without-the-euro-would-europe-have-turned-to-war/2011/09/21/gIQAxGpZrK_story.html Merkel is trying to extinguish European nations and ensure Germany dominates Europe. Instead of encirclement by tanks, modern Germany proceeds by circularly solving a problems of illegal immigration (which they created) by legally binding agreements on all EU members to admit immigration an order of magnitude greater. The German ally in all this their traditional one of the Turks.
Indeed, Simms has written of the “slow strangulation of states such as Greece” by a single currency that benefits Germany. A few decades since Germany was unified and they smother and throttle the life out of their traditional enemies by means of economic and soft power. It is politics as the continuation of blitzkrieg by other means.
All the talk these days is that Germany has some sort of long, deep bond with Turkey, an ancient bond of ‘blood and affection’.
This is pure nonsense.
Mass Turkish immigration into Germany only started in the mid 1960s. After the mass immigration of Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs etc. Yes, for a brief period, 1914-18 the German Empire had a tactical alliance with the Ottoman Empire. But apart from that Turkey to Germany is a foreign country as a foreign country can be. No ties of blood, history, culture, language, religion etc – or even geographic border.
It is central and eastern Europe where Germany has or had its destiny. Unfortunately, the Germans were – and still are – very fond of crapping on this region from a great height from time to time.
Indeed, Turk ‘gadtarbeiters’ only came because Poles were unobtainable, back in the day.
And that was a rather shameful episode, given what the Ottoman empire was then doing to its Christian minorities.
Agree with your asessment, but in the last few years it has become common for German politicians to pretend there is some deep bond of affection between Germans and Turks...which is not the case in general.Replies: @syonredux
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men like the "comedian"Replies: @Jack Hanson, @MEH 0910, @dumpstersquirrel, @reiner Tor
Obvious trolling like this makes it through every time but if something trips Steve’s fainting tripwire that he refuses delineate than good luck getting through.
“This was a world-historical own goal that Ms. Merkel committed last summer, and we need to have a frank conversation about what’s wrong with the zeitgeist that made it seem like a good idea at the time” says Steve. Future observers will know if Merkel was really an agent of History, that her exercise of will really was a genuine historical inflection point. I submit that the Zeitgeist can be neither right nor wrong. The question of men/women of historical greatness remains unexplained. The only useful modern book on this is Sydney Hooks’ 1943 The Hero in History. It is paradoxical that we can understand to some extent the historical past but that it is impossible to understand the present in the same way. As for the forces that drive History, there is no general agreement. We project the notion of ‘human history’ onto atomic events that may in reality merely be stochastic and chaotic.
OT,
When the Fringes Fray, they Fray all the way down:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/us/provost-resigns-amid-sexual-harassment-case-at-berkeley.html
A brown (Indian) dean sexually harasses a brown (AA? Indian? Other?) assistant at Berkeley; he is given a slap on the wrist by a brown (AA) provost; said provost is, finally, from general embarrassment, pushed out of his position.
And the brown provost is none other than Claude Steele, famous or infamous for his “discovery” of stereotype threat. (Given the failure to replicate stereotype threat, who can really believe now that his studies were entirely on the up-and-up?)
You could win Oppression Bingo with this story.
There is only one rule in 'oppression bingo' - namely that 'white' is the anti-trump card.
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men like the "comedian"Replies: @Jack Hanson, @MEH 0910, @dumpstersquirrel, @reiner Tor
Tiny Duck, you once left this in a comment – *Whites have to go and white women deserved to be “raped”* You’re a fine one to be declaiming on irresponsible hate speech.
Look on the bright side:
1/ This comedian will get great publicity (at the cost of a slap on the wrist)
2/ Other jealous comedians (and comedians can get plenty jealous-remember the anti-Leno mess) will copy him.
3/ People will actually hear about a German comedian.
4/ There’s proof that the German fastidiousness about rules still remains. Paleos and HBD’ers should be happy.
So this is the new normal in Europe.
The riots may be over (for now), but life in Ferguson remains , ahem, interesting (mildly NSFW)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=47d_1460773334Replies: @Cracker
That’s filmed in NJ. Not exactly unusual. I see that sort of stuff on a regular basis.
Thanks, I’ll try to post.
The question I have is does this law apply to all foreign leaders, can Kim Jong Un now demand Germany prosecute those that insult him as well ?
Right. After all big, bad Russia is right next door. Unlike Turkey she has enough nukes to wipe Germany off the map. Yet Russia gets the sanctions treatment from the Germans and EU, and Turkey gets the cash and respect. And now they are even trying to blame the migrant crisis on Russia, not Turkey! Merkel does want her Davos friends want.
Russian run it may have been, but, at least it was still ethnically German.Replies: @tris, @RamonaQ
Almost everything he does makes him look like this.
This is a man who authorised the building of hundreds of millions costing gigantic palace for the president when he was prime minister because his term limits were coming and he just decamped to the presidency and who seems to need to believe that Muslims reached the Americas before Columbus (As always the evil Europeans not only concealed this history, they destroyed all the Muslim records and silenced anyone who remembered…) because Islam’s achievement has primarily been to end and retard the glories of the cradles of civilisation.
So you think whites didn’t practice brutal slavery and colonialism?
Changing the subject is a poor excuse of a reply.
"If everyone here were like Ned Flanders, there'd be no need for Heaven. We'd already be there" - Homer Simpson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtOblu3Mp48Replies: @Anonymous
I’m somewhat conflicted about this…Böhmermann is a narcisstic piece of **it, totally on board with the mass immigration project and in general part of the left-leaning German mainstream (apart from Erdogan, other bogeymen for him are Donald Trump, Wladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen, Victor Orban, Poland’s Beate Szydlo and Pim Fortuyn…though I assume he meant Wilders by that since Fortuyn, as we know, was murdered by a leftie activist in 2002). His “satire” of Erdogan was also vulgar and almost without political content…what’s the point in making absurd accusations up about Erdogan like “watches child porn, f**ks goats, goes to gang bang parties” when you’re too cowardly to face the real issue…that Erdogan is a nasty anti-Western demagogue who combines Islamism with Turkish ultra-nationalism, and that a very large percentage of Turks are totally fine with this. Also, in general I do think it’s problematic when some “satirist” who’s employed by a quasi-state broadcasting agency like Germany’s ZDF (financed by a licence fee that is obligatory for all German households…you can go to prison if you refuse to pay) attacks foreign heads of state in such a vulgar manner.
So Merkel’s decision by itself could be justifiable. But the speech the woman gave, was disgusting with its bizarre pro-Turkish platitudes…Turkey is our “friend and partner”, NATO ally and prospective EU member, and there are close ties between the countries because of millions of Turks living in Germany…when an honest asessment would be that large-scale Turkish immigration to Germany was a costly mistake and that Turkey is a deeply unpleasant country with a history extending to the present of persecuting minorities and causing trouble in its neighbourhood (think Cyprus, now Syria), and that a large percentage of its population are Islamists and/or ultra-nationalists. It was an embarrassing display…typical German politician cringe mode.
Also publicly funded media should refrain from Satire at all. Satire is a good thing but I think it should be left for private media. The state should be represented in a sober manner.Replies: @German_reader
On the other hand, from a tactical, rather than principled, standpoint, he looks like a very deserving target.
I'm a little surprised that Böhmermann apparently thought that he would get away with such an over the top attack on a member of an official victim group (Muslim). Did he think his leftist status would protect him? Or something else?Replies: @German_reader
Yes, basically Merkel lets Germany be blackmailed by Turkey so she can save face and pretend to have found a solution for the refugee problem by her deal with Turkey (which includes resettling potentially hundreds of thousands of Syrians now living in Turkey to Germany…and by some, in my opinion credible, media accounts, these people would have immediate access to all welfare benefits and permanent right of residence)…when of course the real reason the Balkans route has dried up are the border-closing measures initiated by Austria and several Balkans states (which have been strongly criticized by the German government for this).
Of course all this totally ignores the situation in Libya/Italy which is likely to get nasty in the coming weeks.
This is pure nonsense.Mass Turkish immigration into Germany only started in the mid 1960s. After the mass immigration of Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs etc. Yes, for a brief period, 1914-18 the German Empire had a tactical alliance with the Ottoman Empire. But apart from that Turkey to Germany is a foreign country as a foreign country can be. No ties of blood, history, culture, language, religion etc - or even geographic border.It is central and eastern Europe where Germany has or had its destiny. Unfortunately, the Germans were - and still are - very fond of crapping on this region from a great height from time to time.
Indeed, Turk 'gadtarbeiters' only came because Poles were unobtainable, back in the day.Replies: @German_reader, @Sean
“for a brief period, 1914-18 the German Empire had a tactical alliance with the Ottoman Empire.”
And that was a rather shameful episode, given what the Ottoman empire was then doing to its Christian minorities.
Agree with your asessment, but in the last few years it has become common for German politicians to pretend there is some deep bond of affection between Germans and Turks…which is not the case in general.
Armenian Massacres:Ethnic Cleansing of Greeks: 360,000 plus deaths
Assyrian Christians: 250,000 plus deathsReplies: @German_reader
Eat My Shorts! I Hate Taxes!
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/hate-taxes-you-certainly-are-not-alone
Böhmermann is from a clique of new comedians who do 70% political lecturing about how dumb, ridiculous and evil racist are and 30% other comedy. It is quite ironical that somebody who´s mane concern is bashing european racists for months and years without any threatening reaction one time makes fun of a non-European muslim and now has to hide, stop his show in TV etc. because serious threats of violence. Because in the end islamists and antiracists have elements in among them who are willing and able to enforce islamist and antiracist aims by violence.
It is exactly this asymmetry which makes people voting for right-wing parties in the first place. Böhmermann now experiences this asymmetry.
Punching up/down
This is pure nonsense.Mass Turkish immigration into Germany only started in the mid 1960s. After the mass immigration of Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs etc. Yes, for a brief period, 1914-18 the German Empire had a tactical alliance with the Ottoman Empire. But apart from that Turkey to Germany is a foreign country as a foreign country can be. No ties of blood, history, culture, language, religion etc - or even geographic border.It is central and eastern Europe where Germany has or had its destiny. Unfortunately, the Germans were - and still are - very fond of crapping on this region from a great height from time to time.
Indeed, Turk 'gadtarbeiters' only came because Poles were unobtainable, back in the day.Replies: @German_reader, @Sean
In an unrelated, under-reported and astonishing piece of news.
The UK government knows what the correct amount of sodomy is .
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/anal-sex-young-people-consultation-dcms-government-tories-worried-thatcher-a6980041.html
How else can there be “too much”?
It's astonishing how gullible and degenerate our culture has become to allow this sometimes dangerous and always unhealthy sexual act to become "popular" and "mainstream".
No.
There is only one rule in ‘oppression bingo’ – namely that ‘white’ is the anti-trump card.
Somehow, I’ve got a sneaking suspicion that many former GDRer Germans would, if forced to make the choice, would have plumped for life under the Russian dominated GDR rather than the Merkel/Economist multiracial circus unified Germany.
Russian run it may have been, but, at least it was still ethnically German.
A frank conversation about the Zeitgeist? Probably not--the inability to have such a conversation is an essential part of the Zeitgeist. The rot in western Europe, the U.S. and Canada goes so deep that probably only a cataclysm will change it.Replies: @Bill Jones, @Expletive Deleted
You are right about Bismarck: It’s been turned into a verb:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bismarcked
Apparently, his holiness the Pope has just flown back from Lesbos, on his private jet, with 12 ‘migrants’ under his arm.
Apart from choosing the biblical number of 12 , and therefore leaving the other few thousand not so favored to their fate, one wonders at this obvious publicity stunt.
As harsh it sounds, the Muslim ‘rescued migrants’ can and must only regard the reigning pontiff as ‘the world’s leader of the infidels’, if not ‘the biggest infidel in the world’ and thus a personage to be naturally regarded with disdain and contempt, at the very least.
Now that Merkel realises that's she's sparked a revolutionary situation across Europe, she's desperate to placate Erdogan. He controls the spigot on this flow of detritus from Inner Asia, after all.
As a student of European history, I know for a mortal fact that this will not end pleasantly.Replies: @NOTA, @Father O'Hara, @AnotherDad
Couldn’t Merkel simply announce a change in German policy and spike Ergodan’s guns?
My not all that informed impression is that, as Ergodan’s party has lost popularity, he has been increasingly hammering dissent at home, blocking social media, etc. Were I Turkish, I’d find the censorship and other governmental behavior around the terrorist attack on the opposition party a few months back scary as hell.
Merkel is a woman. She wants to be dominated. That’s it. Erdogan is her choice. For dominator.
your comment makes interesting reading, but is fatally flawed. Merkel does not do anything which is in the interest of Germany or Germans.
This is the second comedian being prosecuted in Europe. Search on French+Cameroon+Comedian for details on the judicial buffoonery.
So this is the new normal in Europe.
The political entity called “Imperial Germany” has not existed since 1919. Why is this guy being prosecuted for violating a law of a political entity that has not existed for nearly a century?
The state formed in 1871 as the "German Reich" was not dissolved in 1919. It lost all its sovereign princes and got first a provisional republic and then a new republican constitution, but the state was continued without interruption in law [it is an Americanism to assume that the constitution creates the state and the change of the constitution means a new state- no old world country thinks that; indeed- if there were a constitutional convention tomorrow and the 1787 constitution were replaced in toto by a new one, and the country remained the "United States of America", would Americans really regard themselves as living in Year 0 of a new nation?].
The Weimar Republic, a popular neologism still in wide use in the west and used in Germany at the time both by friends [for convenience] and foes [as an insult] was not the name of the state. Neither was "German Republic". The state was called the German Reich. Laws in force that did not conflict with the new constitution were continued until such time as the Reichstag saw fit to amend them, if it ever did.
The German Reich of 1871 was also not technically dissolved in 1945. The unconditional surrender placed all sovereignty in the hands of the allies, who proclaimed their assumption of such. The allies, for various reasons, allowed the construction of German states on [un-annexed] portions of the Reich but neither one was ever the legal successor of the Reich during the period of the occupation. The West German basic law was explicitly provisional for its whole pre-1990 history, pending reunification and a new permanent constitution for the German Reich.
When the two states became sovereign for practical purposes [FRG in I think 1951], international treaties reserved a few matters for the allies and put other issues of state succession on hold pending a formal peace treaty [which had not been signed- the states of war among the various powers with Germany were ended by other legal instruments]. During the period 1951-90, West Germany in particular operated as a sort of provisional successor of the German Reich on the soil it governed, pending the final settlement of all statuses by a peace treaty.
As such, and as is normal in almost any case of state collapse/reconstitution/succession, everyday laws remained in place until and unless amended by the competent sovereign. So, for example, plenty of laws were abolished by the occupation administrations and replaced with others, but only where denazification or allied interests were engaged. The FRG would have amended or replaced other laws by statute at times, but only where necessary. Most of the 1871 civil code is probably still in force, and even where it has been changed, those are amendments to the civil code, not replacements of it.
In 1990, the London Accords that saw all the 4 occupying powers renounce all remaining occupying power rights, recognized the unification of Germany under the existing Federal Republic, served as a peace treaty, settled all borders, and determined that the Federal Republic of Germany is the state successor of the German Reich.
It's a matter of semantics whether you wish to interpret that as meaning:
a) the German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich's soil assumed all its powers in 1990, a new state acting as heir.
b) The German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich's soil was recognized in 1990 as being that state under a new constitution and name.
To give an analogy, no Frenchman regards the Kingdom of France to 1792, French Republic to 1808 [for 3 years it was a republic "governed by an hereditary emperor"...], French Empire 1808-14, Kingdom of France 1814, French Empire 1815, Kingdom of France 1815-30, Kingdom of the French 1830-48, French Republic 1848-51, French Empire 1851-71, French Republic 1871 [prov]-1940, French Republic 1945-58, and French Republic 1958-present as having been different states.
Even where the overthrow is more wholesale, it is actually common for everyday laws in place to be continued by all sorts of successor regimes. Even the US and its original states continued all sorts of laws in place under colonial government, admittedly sometimes by specific adoption but also by passing blanket bills acknowledging that these laws remained in force as normal even though the state had reconstituted its government by convention.Replies: @reiner Tor
Schroeder didn’t father a child either.
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men like the "comedian"Replies: @Jack Hanson, @MEH 0910, @dumpstersquirrel, @reiner Tor
“refugee crisis. Without his help the situation could become disastrous.
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men”
Key terms:
crisis (never let a good one go to waste)
words have consequences (speak honestly, White man, and your life will be destroyed)
diverse (non-White = good)
things should be off limits (any disagreement with the Rainbow left is forbidden)
code for hate speech (any disagreement with the Rainbow left is hate)
privileged white men (anti-White, anti-man hatred)
This is all too pat. I smell a troll.
Off-topic,
An interesting article on the Russian-Jewish response to Trump:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/bernie-sanders-trump-russians/477045/
Karlin offers his take
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/sovok-jews-4-trump/
Why does Europe allow itself to be colonized by millions of Muslim men? Why after 13 centuries of resistance does it succumb now?
Imagine that Europe was one person, and the the total war it suffered in 1914 was a life-threatening cancer. Europe went into remission for two decades and then the cancer recurred. In desperation, Europe chose a kind of chemotherapy which prevented another war by suppressing national pride, tradition and self-defense. But those things were Europe’s immune system, and an immunosuppressed patient cannot mount a response to invading bacterial cells. That is why Europe now cannot defend itself from being colonized by millions of Muslim men.
Or is there also a pre-existing, latent brain infection now coming to the fore? One that is taboo to discuss in polite society? This article on seemingly harmless domestic pets may illuminate the analogy:Is it possible that the shockingly weakened immunity of Europe (and America) may have something to do with this pre-existing condition, the most visible sign of which is Camp of The Saints bienvenue/willkommen cat lady behavior?
P.S., Obligatory (and sincere) ‘polite society’ disclaimer: #NotAllFelines
RE: Germany and Turkey,
It’s always interesting to read what people thought during the Great War.Here’s an excerpt from War in the Garden of Eden, Kermit Roosevelt’s account of his experiences in Mesopotamia during the First World War:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13665/13665-h/13665-h.htm
And, of course, there is also Buchan’s famous spy novel, Greenmantle:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/559/559-h/559-h.htm
The American people must choose: Who will be the American people?
This was a critical question before the Civil War. The USA was created by people from Great Britain. But the plutocrats who owned plantations wanted something more. They got rich from an underclass of slave workers brought from Africa. They wanted to grow the underclass and spread it across the continent.
Most voters opposed the plutocrats and wanted slavery contained, to be abolished later. But both major parties favored the plutocrats. The frustrated voters turned out the incumbent party in every presidential election from 1840 through 1852. Finally desperate voters created a 3rd party specifically to contain slavery (Free Soil) for the 1848 election. But the plutocrats still got what they wanted, including the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, and after the next election the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854. The eventual resolution was war.
Now again the plutocrats want to grow their profits by growing a low-paid American underclass, this time mainly from Latin America. Again most voters want this practice contained, but both parties favor the plutocrats. That didn’t work in the 1850s and it won’t work now.
Is this true? It would seem more accurate to say that Southerners merely wanted to ensure the preservation of the institution within the Southern states. The import of new slaves to the United States had long been barred. And the only real concern with the Western states was not that slavery "spread" there per se but that they not become political opposition to the Sourhern institution.
Russian run it may have been, but, at least it was still ethnically German.Replies: @tris, @RamonaQ
as long as Germany is under the thumb of the US/France/Britain/the chosen, it will just have to bear with everything thrown its way. Germany has not been sovereign since 1945. that’s really all you need to know. the only country with which it could conceivably forge a peace treaty would be Russia, but how can it get to that point whilst being under the control of (the allies-russia+chosen)?
And that was a rather shameful episode, given what the Ottoman empire was then doing to its Christian minorities.
Agree with your asessment, but in the last few years it has become common for German politicians to pretend there is some deep bond of affection between Germans and Turks...which is not the case in general.Replies: @syonredux
Yeah, the Turkish record in the late 19th-early 2oth century is not for the squeamish:
Armenian Massacres:
Ethnic Cleansing of Greeks: 360,000 plus deaths
Assyrian Christians: 250,000 plus deaths
Armenian Massacres:Ethnic Cleansing of Greeks: 360,000 plus deaths
Assyrian Christians: 250,000 plus deathsReplies: @German_reader
They were pretty bad later as well, there were pogroms against the remaining Greeks even in the 1950s, plus constant harassment and persecution of other Christian minorities like the Aramaeans. And it’s not just limited to Christians either…there have been reports that once again the homes of Alevis in Turkey are painted with markings, presumably by ultranationalists or Islamists, like in the 1970s when such actions were a prelude to sectarian killings.
How else can there be "too much"?Replies: @5371, @gda
The minister who recently complained about restrictions on amyl nitrates evidently doesn’t see any problem. Shouldn’t what is sauce for the goose be sauce for the gander?
So Merkel's decision by itself could be justifiable. But the speech the woman gave, was disgusting with its bizarre pro-Turkish platitudes...Turkey is our "friend and partner", NATO ally and prospective EU member, and there are close ties between the countries because of millions of Turks living in Germany...when an honest asessment would be that large-scale Turkish immigration to Germany was a costly mistake and that Turkey is a deeply unpleasant country with a history extending to the present of persecuting minorities and causing trouble in its neighbourhood (think Cyprus, now Syria), and that a large percentage of its population are Islamists and/or ultra-nationalists. It was an embarrassing display...typical German politician cringe mode.Replies: @Erik Sieven, @Anonymous Nephew, @No_0ne
does Erdogan really stand for Turkish ultra-nationalism? I have the impression that for him and his followers Sunni solidarity is much more important than national solidarity.
Also publicly funded media should refrain from Satire at all. Satire is a good thing but I think it should be left for private media. The state should be represented in a sober manner.
Re satire/cabaret in Germany: I have a very low opinion of that in general, most of it doesn't target the truly powerful, but instead acts as a support of the existing system by ridiculing the AfD and "right-wingers" in general...Böhmermann mostly is just another pc propagandist.
I think women go crazy if they don’t have children. Not so with men.
Men go crazy if they can't get sex. A man may have successfully procreated through sex and hence the biological imperative is sated. OTOH it is pretty hard to fool a woman as to whether or not she has carried a child, which is a better test than sex.Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
Who knew that American Sign Language could be so politically correct?
http://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/pages-signs/c/china.htm
Also publicly funded media should refrain from Satire at all. Satire is a good thing but I think it should be left for private media. The state should be represented in a sober manner.Replies: @German_reader
You’re probably right that Islamism ultimately is more important to Erdogan than Turkish nationalism, but from what I’ve read there is at least some synthesis of Islamism and Turkish nationalism (including pan-Turkic schemes), and there have been some media reports of similar things going on in Germany as well (e.g. Grey Wolves being close to Salafists, or Grey Wolves ethnonationalism at least acting as a gateway to later Islamist activism). Don’t ask me how it works, on some level Islam and nationalism of course are contradictory, even antagonistic.
Re satire/cabaret in Germany: I have a very low opinion of that in general, most of it doesn’t target the truly powerful, but instead acts as a support of the existing system by ridiculing the AfD and “right-wingers” in general…Böhmermann mostly is just another pc propagandist.
I’m waiting for Andrew Sullivan to write about this.
Well, no shit.
I don’t see how you can get to 56% easily without viewing at least 100 such scenes.
And?
I guess she didn’t find it pleasurable.
She should just say to Erdogan.
Ever hear of the Wehrmact or the Waffen SS?
I’d say MEH pretty much laid your sorry state of morals/ethics bare.
Changing the subject is a poor excuse of a reply.
Never put women in charge of anything!
Yes, but so did Sumerians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Medes, Persians, Arabs, Mongols, Ottomans, etc.
Imagine that Europe was one person, and the the total war it suffered in 1914 was a life-threatening cancer. Europe went into remission for two decades and then the cancer recurred. In desperation, Europe chose a kind of chemotherapy which prevented another war by suppressing national pride, tradition and self-defense. But those things were Europe's immune system, and an immunosuppressed patient cannot mount a response to invading bacterial cells. That is why Europe now cannot defend itself from being colonized by millions of Muslim men.Replies: @Anonym, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Anonymous
There is some truth to what you say. However… Cultural Marxism began with the Frankfurt School prior to ww2 and not for the purposes of WW prevention.
I think women go crazy if they don’t have children. Not so with men.
Men go crazy if they can’t get sex. A man may have successfully procreated through sex and hence the biological imperative is sated. OTOH it is pretty hard to fool a woman as to whether or not she has carried a child, which is a better test than sex.
You're so right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz5gja7XtYE
“This was a world-historical own goal that Ms. Merkel committed last summer, and we need to have a frank conversation about what’s wrong with the zeitgeist that made it seem like a good idea at the time.”
Well, according to the immigration enthusiasts, this will make a more vibrant, economically powerful and open Germany.
We’ll see how the Germans actually like it. Small detail for economists.
(Also, spoiler alert – if it doesn’t work out great, that’s because the country didn’t assimilate correctly. So it’s their fault. The impeccable logic of mass immigration is not therefore broken.)
If so, South Park is in trouble.
Trust me. Women go crazy either way.
This was a critical question before the Civil War. The USA was created by people from Great Britain. But the plutocrats who owned plantations wanted something more. They got rich from an underclass of slave workers brought from Africa. They wanted to grow the underclass and spread it across the continent.
Most voters opposed the plutocrats and wanted slavery contained, to be abolished later. But both major parties favored the plutocrats. The frustrated voters turned out the incumbent party in every presidential election from 1840 through 1852. Finally desperate voters created a 3rd party specifically to contain slavery (Free Soil) for the 1848 election. But the plutocrats still got what they wanted, including the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, and after the next election the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854. The eventual resolution was war.
Now again the plutocrats want to grow their profits by growing a low-paid American underclass, this time mainly from Latin America. Again most voters want this practice contained, but both parties favor the plutocrats. That didn't work in the 1850s and it won't work now.Replies: @Anonymous
But the plutocrats who owned plantations wanted something more. They got rich from an underclass of slave workers brought from Africa. They wanted to grow the underclass and spread it across the continent.
Is this true? It would seem more accurate to say that Southerners merely wanted to ensure the preservation of the institution within the Southern states. The import of new slaves to the United States had long been barred. And the only real concern with the Western states was not that slavery “spread” there per se but that they not become political opposition to the Sourhern institution.
Boehmermann is responsible for this bit of nauseating “humor” called “We Germans are Proud of Not Being Proud”. I think Merkel is acting obsequiously, and perhaps treasonously. But Boehmermann would not have a career if I ran Germany.
there was a case in the us about a german couple who wanted to home school their children in germany then fled to the us because of a third reich law against home schooling. maybe the “west” for the next 20 years or so make it fun to rescind laws and regulations.
Well that’s hardly unprecedented in German history lol. In fact it seems to be the norm.
I will say I’m not sure she faced a great deal of resistance to begin with. Her insane decision is quite in life with the mass psychosis Germany has been under for the last 70 years.
OT but The Atlantic has a piece up about why crime has declined in the US, a common Steve topic.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/what-caused-the-crime-decline/477408/?utm_source=atl-daily-newsletter
I imagine he’s also flexing his newfound muscles and seeing how far it’ll get him.
Hey Steve, the EU endgame was set in the 1920s by the Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, the mass 3rd World invasion was planned, hard to believe but is true.
Now that Merkel realises that's she's sparked a revolutionary situation across Europe, she's desperate to placate Erdogan. He controls the spigot on this flow of detritus from Inner Asia, after all.
As a student of European history, I know for a mortal fact that this will not end pleasantly.Replies: @NOTA, @Father O'Hara, @AnotherDad
And WE have a similarly old,homely,resentful,stupid,and over her head woman ready to take the reins on Amurrika!
The terrible problem in the West with the likes of Merkel is their dressing themselves in the clothes of compassion and boastful morality has flooded their thinking; forgetting that all others will make their opportunistic calculations on the basis of cold, hard reality. She and all others who cannot make the necessary tough actions against third-world invaders and much else should go flutter their deeply destructive altruisms elsewhere.
Isaiah Berlin on Machiavelli:
“If you object to the political methods recommended because they seem to you morally detestable, if you refuse to embark upon them because they are, to use Ritter’s word, ‘erschreckend’, too frightening, Machiavelli has no answer, no argument. In that case you are perfectly entitled to lead a morally good life, be a private citizen (or a monk), seek some corner of your own. But, in that event, you must not make yourself responsible for the lives of others or expect good fortune ; in a material sense you must expect to be ignored or destroyed.”
Now that Merkel realises that's she's sparked a revolutionary situation across Europe, she's desperate to placate Erdogan. He controls the spigot on this flow of detritus from Inner Asia, after all.
As a student of European history, I know for a mortal fact that this will not end pleasantly.Replies: @NOTA, @Father O'Hara, @AnotherDad
“Not end pleasantly”? Well there’s an understatement.
Merkel is simply the worst Chancellor in German history. Yeah, i know that’s supposed to be a high unreachable bar. But it’s not.
Hitler merely killed a *lot* of people. An utter disaster for *individuals*, millions dead, incredible pain and suffering. But at the end of it … Europe was still there. Russia, Poland with millions dead … still there. Even Germany was still there. Borders moved a bit but Germany was still Germany. Even the Jews, who Hitler had mass murdered by the millions with genocidal intent–still had their race intact and actually were motivated to go create their own nation. Come say 1950, Europe was intact and recovering, all its races and nations intact–if some under the thumb of the Soviets. Again immense *individual* pain, suffering and death … but races and cultures and nations intact.
Merkel in *one year* has permanently altered–screwed up–Germany. When assessing the damage forget about Germany’s nominal “80 million”. What matters is reproduction. These refugees are mostly young reproductive age and overwhelmingly male. They’ll either later bring in matching young women or impregnate German women, squeezing out German men. Germany has only about 5 million men in their 20s. Cohorts behind in the teens are even smaller. But let’s be generous and say Germany’s current “coming into breeding” generation has about 10m men.
Realistically Merkel has already introduced a 10% foreign element–and she’s not done. Even if people are fed up and get rid of her and close the border later this year … she’ll have replaced 20% of Germany’s population with a foreign, culturally alien, hostile population. And one that will reproduce *faster* than Germans. She’s done to Germany, something actually greater in magnitude and effect to what African slavery did to the US–and in one year! For *no purpose*!
People just have their heads in the sand on how incredibly terrible this is, how incredibly evil our “elites” are. The future of the West is being destroyed right in front of our eyes. Even Hitler could not accomplish such destruction.
If you lived in Germany in the late 1970s, as I did, and then returned 30 years later, the profound demographic changes were already obvious and dismaying. People like Theo Sarrazin have been warning about the consequences of Germany's immigration policy for a decade. By pushing the immigration issue to the forefront instead of following the drip-drip strategy Germany had been following, Merkel may have inadvertently done Germany a favor. Without Merkel's blunders would the AfD have become a major political force? Would an anti-immigrant party have taken power in Poland? Would Brexit have a chance of succeeding? Probably not. A wiser and more evil politician than Merkel would never have created a crisis that might be the Right's last chance.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
It is mostly about Erdogan trying to manipulate his loyal emigrant supporters in Germany. If an Italian or English comedian had done the same thing, Erdogan wouldn’t care. But Turks are getting increasingly good at using “grievances” against native Germans to acquire more goods and power.
Yes, they're very adept at playing the Nazi card. Which enrages me given Turkey's many, many crimes and Turks' persistent refusal to even admit them.Replies: @Bill B., @Anonymous, @AndrewR
He has a long history of being petty and tyrannical. He appears not to care at all about what Western citizens thinks. This episode fits his style perfectly. He’s not trying to impress us, he’s trying to project his power over Turkey.
Men go crazy if they can't get sex. A man may have successfully procreated through sex and hence the biological imperative is sated. OTOH it is pretty hard to fool a woman as to whether or not she has carried a child, which is a better test than sex.Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
“Men go crazy if they can’t get sex.”
You’re so right.
Why feed the troll at all? Perhaps Steve/Ron should have a little troll icon which appears on the posts of obvious offenders.
So Merkel's decision by itself could be justifiable. But the speech the woman gave, was disgusting with its bizarre pro-Turkish platitudes...Turkey is our "friend and partner", NATO ally and prospective EU member, and there are close ties between the countries because of millions of Turks living in Germany...when an honest asessment would be that large-scale Turkish immigration to Germany was a costly mistake and that Turkey is a deeply unpleasant country with a history extending to the present of persecuting minorities and causing trouble in its neighbourhood (think Cyprus, now Syria), and that a large percentage of its population are Islamists and/or ultra-nationalists. It was an embarrassing display...typical German politician cringe mode.Replies: @Erik Sieven, @Anonymous Nephew, @No_0ne
“It was an embarrassing display…typical German politician cringe mode.”
Compare with German treatment of Greece. Was it Churchill who said that the German is either at your throat or at your feet?
Whites are the greatest force for progress and humanitarianism on earth. The whiter the world becomes, the more progressive it becomes. Whites are the Ned Flanders of the human race.
“If everyone here were like Ned Flanders, there’d be no need for Heaven. We’d already be there” – Homer Simpson
Construction workers in New York City do not like Hildabeast. Jeanine Pirro hit the streets to ask who they are voting for and they are split between Donald Trump & Bernie Sanders. None of them answered Hillary.
Hildabeast is seen as an elitist snob by blue collar New York City construction workers. None of them would want to have a beer with her.
Merkel is simply the worst Chancellor in German history. Yeah, i know that's supposed to be a high unreachable bar. But it's not.
Hitler merely killed a *lot* of people. An utter disaster for *individuals*, millions dead, incredible pain and suffering. But at the end of it ... Europe was still there. Russia, Poland with millions dead ... still there. Even Germany was still there. Borders moved a bit but Germany was still Germany. Even the Jews, who Hitler had mass murdered by the millions with genocidal intent--still had their race intact and actually were motivated to go create their own nation. Come say 1950, Europe was intact and recovering, all its races and nations intact--if some under the thumb of the Soviets. Again immense *individual* pain, suffering and death ... but races and cultures and nations intact.
Merkel in *one year* has permanently altered--screwed up--Germany. When assessing the damage forget about Germany's nominal "80 million". What matters is reproduction. These refugees are mostly young reproductive age and overwhelmingly male. They'll either later bring in matching young women or impregnate German women, squeezing out German men. Germany has only about 5 million men in their 20s. Cohorts behind in the teens are even smaller. But let's be generous and say Germany's current "coming into breeding" generation has about 10m men.
Realistically Merkel has already introduced a 10% foreign element--and she's not done. Even if people are fed up and get rid of her and close the border later this year ... she'll have replaced 20% of Germany's population with a foreign, culturally alien, hostile population. And one that will reproduce *faster* than Germans. She's done to Germany, something actually greater in magnitude and effect to what African slavery did to the US--and in one year! For *no purpose*!
People just have their heads in the sand on how incredibly terrible this is, how incredibly evil our "elites" are. The future of the West is being destroyed right in front of our eyes. Even Hitler could not accomplish such destruction.Replies: @Peter Akuleyev, @Anon 2
No, she only slightly accelerated changes that have been taking place for the last 30 years. If anything maybe we should be thankful that Merkel has laid the problem so explicitly bare.
If you lived in Germany in the late 1970s, as I did, and then returned 30 years later, the profound demographic changes were already obvious and dismaying. People like Theo Sarrazin have been warning about the consequences of Germany’s immigration policy for a decade. By pushing the immigration issue to the forefront instead of following the drip-drip strategy Germany had been following, Merkel may have inadvertently done Germany a favor. Without Merkel’s blunders would the AfD have become a major political force? Would an anti-immigrant party have taken power in Poland? Would Brexit have a chance of succeeding? Probably not. A wiser and more evil politician than Merkel would never have created a crisis that might be the Right’s last chance.
Imagine that Europe was one person, and the the total war it suffered in 1914 was a life-threatening cancer. Europe went into remission for two decades and then the cancer recurred. In desperation, Europe chose a kind of chemotherapy which prevented another war by suppressing national pride, tradition and self-defense. But those things were Europe's immune system, and an immunosuppressed patient cannot mount a response to invading bacterial cells. That is why Europe now cannot defend itself from being colonized by millions of Muslim men.Replies: @Anonym, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Anonymous
Clever analysis from an oncology perspective, but perhaps not “deep” enough from an infectious disease consideration. True, Europe’s immune system is suppressed and weakened. But is it entirely due to a newfound aversion to the violence of war?
Or is there also a pre-existing, latent brain infection now coming to the fore? One that is taboo to discuss in polite society? This article on seemingly harmless domestic pets may illuminate the analogy:
Is it possible that the shockingly weakened immunity of Europe (and America) may have something to do with this pre-existing condition, the most visible sign of which is Camp of The Saints bienvenue/willkommen cat lady behavior?
P.S., Obligatory (and sincere) ‘polite society’ disclaimer: #NotAllFelines
Imagine that Europe was one person, and the the total war it suffered in 1914 was a life-threatening cancer. Europe went into remission for two decades and then the cancer recurred. In desperation, Europe chose a kind of chemotherapy which prevented another war by suppressing national pride, tradition and self-defense. But those things were Europe's immune system, and an immunosuppressed patient cannot mount a response to invading bacterial cells. That is why Europe now cannot defend itself from being colonized by millions of Muslim men.Replies: @Anonym, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Anonymous
Interesting. But there’s a dichotomy — chemo or cancer? The last time the cancer killed tens of millions of whites. If the cancer returns how many more whites will be killed?
The main problem is Germans aren’t making babies. If that continues for several more generations, Germany is finished (interestingly, Turks face a similar situation). Immigration accelerates the process and makes recovery more challenging, but it’s not the primary difficulty.
Higher IQ races and ethnicities are mostly committing suicide, with only a handful of exceptions. Even Japan and Korea may face an existential crisis. Without a dramatic increase in fertility, they will be unable to resist the waves of humanity that will inevitably invade.
Appeals to patriotism or ethnic pride can only work when the danger appears imminent. It can work in Israel (for awhile), but not Italy. Most people can’t wrap their heads around trends continuing for 50-100 years in the future.
The only thing that will work is changing the culture. When having no kids (by choice) is considered shameful, the problem will be solved. I’d much rather my kids have jobs waiting tables at Denny’s and have families than be rich and successful, but childless.
Basically, there are only two choices facing any nation state with an intelligent population and an effective government, namely:
1/. Continuous (that is exponential) population growth - which despite all the shit you might read from certain, disreputable, sources is ecologically untenable and can only lead to a Malthusian mass die-off.
-or-
2/. Population control.
Now, I'm not claiming that option 2 is perfect and doesn't come with huge problems, but the point is that an intelligent ethny could manage those difficulties. The upshot is that as long as productivity levels improve by something meager, even something like 1 or 2% per annum, which has been the typical current level for decades, any potential loss due to that tired old fiction 'an ageing population' can be managed. Look at Italy. Somehow it manages to combine massive levels of youth unemployment - thanks to the shitheaded economic policies of the EU, combined with the continuous run of the smallest ever birth cohorts ever seen by any nation in recorded and unrecorded history. And yet, Italy is able to provide all her citizens with an 'adequate' standard of living.Replies: @Ozymandias, @Judah Benjamin Hur
"If everyone here were like Ned Flanders, there'd be no need for Heaven. We'd already be there" - Homer Simpson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtOblu3Mp48Replies: @Anonymous
I would agree with this statement if it was limited only to Northwest and Central Europeans. Also Celtic people should be excluded.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treehouse_of_Horror_V#Time_and_Punishment
Higher IQ races and ethnicities are mostly committing suicide, with only a handful of exceptions. Even Japan and Korea may face an existential crisis. Without a dramatic increase in fertility, they will be unable to resist the waves of humanity that will inevitably invade.
Appeals to patriotism or ethnic pride can only work when the danger appears imminent. It can work in Israel (for awhile), but not Italy. Most people can't wrap their heads around trends continuing for 50-100 years in the future.
The only thing that will work is changing the culture. When having no kids (by choice) is considered shameful, the problem will be solved. I'd much rather my kids have jobs waiting tables at Denny's and have families than be rich and successful, but childless.Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @tris
The grandchildren of immigrants arriving to Germany will in 2100 be considered ethnic Germans. People with 1/4 African and 3/4 German ancestry will be considered as ethnic Germany as a 100% pure German by then.
ropo, Mike Sylvester’s comment was quite amusing; you may have missed the [sarc] tag.
I know people are keen on free speech but words have consequences. In a diverse and open society certain things should be off limits.
Free speech is usually a code for hate speech and is exercised almost exclusively by privileged white men like the "comedian"Replies: @Jack Hanson, @MEH 0910, @dumpstersquirrel, @reiner Tor
Tiny/Sick Duck is not really trolling, he’s being sarcastic. Or at least what he’s doing is indistinguishable from sarcasm.
Higher IQ races and ethnicities are mostly committing suicide, with only a handful of exceptions. Even Japan and Korea may face an existential crisis. Without a dramatic increase in fertility, they will be unable to resist the waves of humanity that will inevitably invade.
Appeals to patriotism or ethnic pride can only work when the danger appears imminent. It can work in Israel (for awhile), but not Italy. Most people can't wrap their heads around trends continuing for 50-100 years in the future.
The only thing that will work is changing the culture. When having no kids (by choice) is considered shameful, the problem will be solved. I'd much rather my kids have jobs waiting tables at Denny's and have families than be rich and successful, but childless.Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @tris
Nonsense.
Basically, there are only two choices facing any nation state with an intelligent population and an effective government, namely:
1/. Continuous (that is exponential) population growth – which despite all the shit you might read from certain, disreputable, sources is ecologically untenable and can only lead to a Malthusian mass die-off.
-or-
2/. Population control.
Now, I’m not claiming that option 2 is perfect and doesn’t come with huge problems, but the point is that an intelligent ethny could manage those difficulties. The upshot is that as long as productivity levels improve by something meager, even something like 1 or 2% per annum, which has been the typical current level for decades, any potential loss due to that tired old fiction ‘an ageing population’ can be managed. Look at Italy. Somehow it manages to combine massive levels of youth unemployment – thanks to the shitheaded economic policies of the EU, combined with the continuous run of the smallest ever birth cohorts ever seen by any nation in recorded and unrecorded history. And yet, Italy is able to provide all her citizens with an ‘adequate’ standard of living.
A fertility rate of 1.8 or 1.9, slightly below replacement, could be rationalized as "population control." In the long run even that is not sustainable, but probably can be managed for several generations. However, under 1.5 can only be described as suicide. The fertility rate for ethnic Germans is 1.3.
Another good example of why “German comedian” is an oxymoron.
There are two types of trolling. One type takes a point of view that the troller disagrees with and exaggerates it to demonstrate its absurdity. The other type expresses the honest viewpoint of the troller and he drops it into a forum where it’s obvious it will be disagreed with. We really need two separate terms for these two types of trolling. IMO, Tiny Duck is of the first type.
Merkel is simply the worst Chancellor in German history. Yeah, i know that's supposed to be a high unreachable bar. But it's not.
Hitler merely killed a *lot* of people. An utter disaster for *individuals*, millions dead, incredible pain and suffering. But at the end of it ... Europe was still there. Russia, Poland with millions dead ... still there. Even Germany was still there. Borders moved a bit but Germany was still Germany. Even the Jews, who Hitler had mass murdered by the millions with genocidal intent--still had their race intact and actually were motivated to go create their own nation. Come say 1950, Europe was intact and recovering, all its races and nations intact--if some under the thumb of the Soviets. Again immense *individual* pain, suffering and death ... but races and cultures and nations intact.
Merkel in *one year* has permanently altered--screwed up--Germany. When assessing the damage forget about Germany's nominal "80 million". What matters is reproduction. These refugees are mostly young reproductive age and overwhelmingly male. They'll either later bring in matching young women or impregnate German women, squeezing out German men. Germany has only about 5 million men in their 20s. Cohorts behind in the teens are even smaller. But let's be generous and say Germany's current "coming into breeding" generation has about 10m men.
Realistically Merkel has already introduced a 10% foreign element--and she's not done. Even if people are fed up and get rid of her and close the border later this year ... she'll have replaced 20% of Germany's population with a foreign, culturally alien, hostile population. And one that will reproduce *faster* than Germans. She's done to Germany, something actually greater in magnitude and effect to what African slavery did to the US--and in one year! For *no purpose*!
People just have their heads in the sand on how incredibly terrible this is, how incredibly evil our "elites" are. The future of the West is being destroyed right in front of our eyes. Even Hitler could not accomplish such destruction.Replies: @Peter Akuleyev, @Anon 2
Here’s an interesting question to contemplate: Why is it
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America’s
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
“So Germany isn’t good enough for you?” except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women –
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria – in a few hours we’ll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks – too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at home
For a while, it was substantially better to be conquered by Germany than Russia. Then Eastern Europeans got a surprise in WW2...
physical illnessLike you say, it seems to be women caught up in a romantic air. The burden of history is much for many to bear. As you can imagine though, I admire Teutonic qualities - the engineering, musical ability, soldiering, athletics, low corruption at any rateHmm.. Upper East side. Perhaps I shall find a wife thereReplies: @Anon 2
Higher IQ races and ethnicities are mostly committing suicide, with only a handful of exceptions. Even Japan and Korea may face an existential crisis. Without a dramatic increase in fertility, they will be unable to resist the waves of humanity that will inevitably invade.
Appeals to patriotism or ethnic pride can only work when the danger appears imminent. It can work in Israel (for awhile), but not Italy. Most people can't wrap their heads around trends continuing for 50-100 years in the future.
The only thing that will work is changing the culture. When having no kids (by choice) is considered shameful, the problem will be solved. I'd much rather my kids have jobs waiting tables at Denny's and have families than be rich and successful, but childless.Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @tris
its not only the modern individualism and career-mindedness of educated women, its also the german gov and industry which make family formation hideously expensive. essentially if you want to have a family and kids in germany, you have to opt for poverty. that’s why many immigrants have kids, they are at the bottom of the rung, and yet well off compared to where they came from. they are not bogged down by high social expectations and heavy work obligations. a win-win.
Russian run it may have been, but, at least it was still ethnically German.Replies: @tris, @RamonaQ
Good point. The commies turned out to be better for the native population than the cultural Marxists.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise”
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
Germany as a political entity as opposed to a geographic region didn’t exist before 1871. Determing the beginnings of the United Kingdom and France is a bit more problematic, but arguably England dates from 1066, and the United Kingdom from about 1701. France might have begun as early as Charlemagne, but a lot of consolidation probably occurred during the reign of Louis XIII and Louis XIV. Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment shows a lot of significant figures from present-day Germany. German language and culture had enormous prestige in the U.S. prior to World War I, especially in the Midwest. Into the 1930s, many scientific papers were published in German, not English. The anti-German sentiment of World War I and the Nazi atrocities of World War II have obscured a great deal of previous German cultural and scientific prestige. Germany neve had much in the way of overseas colonies to spread its language, but I wonder to what extent France really benefitted from her colonies. Great Britain probably did, although the present patterns of immigration in the UK from former colonies may make even that questionable.
For many years, England was considered a backwater; the Renaissance began in Italy. Don’t sell Germans short.
“But Turks are getting increasingly good at using “grievances” against native Germans to acquire more goods and power.”
Yes, they’re very adept at playing the Nazi card. Which enrages me given Turkey’s many, many crimes and Turks’ persistent refusal to even admit them.
“They love to be cursed and kicked. It is all they understand. It is in the blood. All this pretence of democracy is killing them. They want some sultans and wars and rape and fun. Poor brutes, in their striped suits and bowler hats. They are miserable. You've only got to look at them. However, to hell with them all. Any news?'
Bond shook his head. He told Kerim about the change of room and the untouched suitcase.”
Excerpt From: Fleming, Ian. “Bond 5 - From Russia with Love.” iBooks.Replies: @Clyde
How else can there be "too much"?Replies: @5371, @gda
One wonders whether any at all is “too much”.
It’s astonishing how gullible and degenerate our culture has become to allow this sometimes dangerous and always unhealthy sexual act to become “popular” and “mainstream”.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
German music, philosophy, literature, architecture?
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
*spits out coffee*
What?
The same Germany that had the Holy Roman Empire, you mean?
The same Germany that, in the 19th Century, made more scientific accomplishments than any other nation on earth—and huge ones at that?
The same one that had the greatest national film industry of the 1920s ?
The same one that produced Wagner and Beethoven?
The same one that became a watchword for higher education for 200 years—to be educated in Germany meant you attended the very best universities?
Perhaps your problem is that you’ve actually not studied the history of Germany and are only looking at the current situation and Western world view. That’s understandable. But do a bit of historical research first—you sound utterly foolish.
And let’s be clear that “Germany” really was a lot of separate nations for a good long period, thanks to geographical divides. It was only technological advances in transportation that created the nation as united as we see today. But even despite that, Germany’s accomplishments are truly great.
“Imperial Germany” is an English-language coinage of convenience.
The state formed in 1871 as the “German Reich” was not dissolved in 1919. It lost all its sovereign princes and got first a provisional republic and then a new republican constitution, but the state was continued without interruption in law [it is an Americanism to assume that the constitution creates the state and the change of the constitution means a new state- no old world country thinks that; indeed- if there were a constitutional convention tomorrow and the 1787 constitution were replaced in toto by a new one, and the country remained the “United States of America”, would Americans really regard themselves as living in Year 0 of a new nation?].
The Weimar Republic, a popular neologism still in wide use in the west and used in Germany at the time both by friends [for convenience] and foes [as an insult] was not the name of the state. Neither was “German Republic”. The state was called the German Reich. Laws in force that did not conflict with the new constitution were continued until such time as the Reichstag saw fit to amend them, if it ever did.
The German Reich of 1871 was also not technically dissolved in 1945. The unconditional surrender placed all sovereignty in the hands of the allies, who proclaimed their assumption of such. The allies, for various reasons, allowed the construction of German states on [un-annexed] portions of the Reich but neither one was ever the legal successor of the Reich during the period of the occupation. The West German basic law was explicitly provisional for its whole pre-1990 history, pending reunification and a new permanent constitution for the German Reich.
When the two states became sovereign for practical purposes [FRG in I think 1951], international treaties reserved a few matters for the allies and put other issues of state succession on hold pending a formal peace treaty [which had not been signed- the states of war among the various powers with Germany were ended by other legal instruments]. During the period 1951-90, West Germany in particular operated as a sort of provisional successor of the German Reich on the soil it governed, pending the final settlement of all statuses by a peace treaty.
As such, and as is normal in almost any case of state collapse/reconstitution/succession, everyday laws remained in place until and unless amended by the competent sovereign. So, for example, plenty of laws were abolished by the occupation administrations and replaced with others, but only where denazification or allied interests were engaged. The FRG would have amended or replaced other laws by statute at times, but only where necessary. Most of the 1871 civil code is probably still in force, and even where it has been changed, those are amendments to the civil code, not replacements of it.
In 1990, the London Accords that saw all the 4 occupying powers renounce all remaining occupying power rights, recognized the unification of Germany under the existing Federal Republic, served as a peace treaty, settled all borders, and determined that the Federal Republic of Germany is the state successor of the German Reich.
It’s a matter of semantics whether you wish to interpret that as meaning:
a) the German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich’s soil assumed all its powers in 1990, a new state acting as heir.
b) The German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich’s soil was recognized in 1990 as being that state under a new constitution and name.
To give an analogy, no Frenchman regards the Kingdom of France to 1792, French Republic to 1808 [for 3 years it was a republic “governed by an hereditary emperor”…], French Empire 1808-14, Kingdom of France 1814, French Empire 1815, Kingdom of France 1815-30, Kingdom of the French 1830-48, French Republic 1848-51, French Empire 1851-71, French Republic 1871 [prov]-1940, French Republic 1945-58, and French Republic 1958-present as having been different states.
Even where the overthrow is more wholesale, it is actually common for everyday laws in place to be continued by all sorts of successor regimes. Even the US and its original states continued all sorts of laws in place under colonial government, admittedly sometimes by specific adoption but also by passing blanket bills acknowledging that these laws remained in force as normal even though the state had reconstituted its government by convention.
The state formed in 1871 as the "German Reich" was not dissolved in 1919. It lost all its sovereign princes and got first a provisional republic and then a new republican constitution, but the state was continued without interruption in law [it is an Americanism to assume that the constitution creates the state and the change of the constitution means a new state- no old world country thinks that; indeed- if there were a constitutional convention tomorrow and the 1787 constitution were replaced in toto by a new one, and the country remained the "United States of America", would Americans really regard themselves as living in Year 0 of a new nation?].
The Weimar Republic, a popular neologism still in wide use in the west and used in Germany at the time both by friends [for convenience] and foes [as an insult] was not the name of the state. Neither was "German Republic". The state was called the German Reich. Laws in force that did not conflict with the new constitution were continued until such time as the Reichstag saw fit to amend them, if it ever did.
The German Reich of 1871 was also not technically dissolved in 1945. The unconditional surrender placed all sovereignty in the hands of the allies, who proclaimed their assumption of such. The allies, for various reasons, allowed the construction of German states on [un-annexed] portions of the Reich but neither one was ever the legal successor of the Reich during the period of the occupation. The West German basic law was explicitly provisional for its whole pre-1990 history, pending reunification and a new permanent constitution for the German Reich.
When the two states became sovereign for practical purposes [FRG in I think 1951], international treaties reserved a few matters for the allies and put other issues of state succession on hold pending a formal peace treaty [which had not been signed- the states of war among the various powers with Germany were ended by other legal instruments]. During the period 1951-90, West Germany in particular operated as a sort of provisional successor of the German Reich on the soil it governed, pending the final settlement of all statuses by a peace treaty.
As such, and as is normal in almost any case of state collapse/reconstitution/succession, everyday laws remained in place until and unless amended by the competent sovereign. So, for example, plenty of laws were abolished by the occupation administrations and replaced with others, but only where denazification or allied interests were engaged. The FRG would have amended or replaced other laws by statute at times, but only where necessary. Most of the 1871 civil code is probably still in force, and even where it has been changed, those are amendments to the civil code, not replacements of it.
In 1990, the London Accords that saw all the 4 occupying powers renounce all remaining occupying power rights, recognized the unification of Germany under the existing Federal Republic, served as a peace treaty, settled all borders, and determined that the Federal Republic of Germany is the state successor of the German Reich.
It's a matter of semantics whether you wish to interpret that as meaning:
a) the German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich's soil assumed all its powers in 1990, a new state acting as heir.
b) The German Reich lasted 1871-1990 in law and the already existing de facto FRG formed 1949-51 on the Reich's soil was recognized in 1990 as being that state under a new constitution and name.
To give an analogy, no Frenchman regards the Kingdom of France to 1792, French Republic to 1808 [for 3 years it was a republic "governed by an hereditary emperor"...], French Empire 1808-14, Kingdom of France 1814, French Empire 1815, Kingdom of France 1815-30, Kingdom of the French 1830-48, French Republic 1848-51, French Empire 1851-71, French Republic 1871 [prov]-1940, French Republic 1945-58, and French Republic 1958-present as having been different states.
Even where the overthrow is more wholesale, it is actually common for everyday laws in place to be continued by all sorts of successor regimes. Even the US and its original states continued all sorts of laws in place under colonial government, admittedly sometimes by specific adoption but also by passing blanket bills acknowledging that these laws remained in force as normal even though the state had reconstituted its government by convention.Replies: @reiner Tor
I knew almost everything you wrote, but it was still an interesting summary.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
The ‘flaw in the German character’ is being surrounded on all sides by powerful and dangerous states.
This statement is only credible if you refer specifically to the secular social-democratic-liberal Kemalist state and army known as Turkey to which Erdogan is doing his best to put an end, and even then, a fair few Greeks and Armenians would beg to differ.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
I’ve been ‘anti-German guy’ on this site many a time, and I will be again…
But c’mon.
The Germans, like the English/British [taken as a whole], French, and Italians, and maybe Dutch, were tier one contributors to western civilization, and like them contributed elements to most major fields of cultural endeavour, albeit with a degree of emphasis on some over others.
The Germans were the music masters of Europe for 200 years, outshining the Italians and French, the other big leaders, and far ahead of the 2nd tier Spanish, Russians or others.
The Germans were contributors in the visual arts, albeit behind the French, Italians, and Dutch.
The Germans also made major contributions to literature, albeit behind the French, Italians, and English [even if you exclude Irish writing in English]. Maybe the Russians should also be on tier one in this category.
Philosophy too, though I admit German philosophy’s constant attempts to systematize both itself and the world has left me cold.
The Germans mainly stunk up the joint at law [brilliant legal thinkers but too much assumption of servile premises] and politics, but then so did every other European culture except the English, so that’s not too much of a black mark.
They DID fail to spread a specifically German civilization, speaking German and governed by Germans according to German principles, around the world. That does speak to the political position of the German world in the 18th and 19th c, which in turn does suggest some of the weaknesses of the German political traditions. But they also faced tough geographic and political legacies dating back to the Middle Ages.
And of course German models of doing science and education were spread everywhere, having a profound impact on the west and world, and even changing the direction of the Anglo world in key respects. So there’s that.
The reason why "German civilization" is not more noticeable worldwide is because (1) Germany never really had any substantial colonies to impose its language (although parts of Eastern Europe, including much of present day Poland (and virtually all of its architecture), Czechia (whatever), and the Baltics were "German colonies".) (2) Germans assimilate very readily into non-German speaking countries.
Speaking of German contributions to the arts and sciences, I think we should at least tip our hats to them in the realm of theology: there was this thing called the Reformation, after all.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @random observer
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
For starters, he’s got a hell of a lot of competition. And not every strongman is in such close proximity or such a current position to wreck the kind of havoc he is currently wrecking on Europe. I live in France and I assure you that every good and decent informed human being left on this continent has nothing but loathing and resentment for Erdogan. I wish he would show his face over here so we the people could drive him out the way we drove out the King of Saudi Arabia last summer. Never been prouder of the French.
Much of the urban culture in Eastern Europe was due to “Germanic civilization” originally. As recently as 1800 many of the big towns in Eastern Europe — e.g., Prague and Budapest (then, Ofen-Pest) were mostly German speaking. And it is well known that most of the cities in Poland (e.g., Krakow) were initially formed, settled, and built by German-speaking merchants and artisans.
The reason why “German civilization” is not more noticeable worldwide is because (1) Germany never really had any substantial colonies to impose its language (although parts of Eastern Europe, including much of present day Poland (and virtually all of its architecture), Czechia (whatever), and the Baltics were “German colonies”.) (2) Germans assimilate very readily into non-German speaking countries.
Speaking of German contributions to the arts and sciences, I think we should at least tip our hats to them in the realm of theology: there was this thing called the Reformation, after all.
It would be pretty hard to either easily summarize or overstate the contributions of the German people to advancement in the sciences, particularly physics, chemistry, and all derivative engineering disciplines. We'd be nowhere without the contributions of 19th century and early 20th century Germany.
I'd agree on theology, but I'm not convinced all the pros and cons of the Reformation have yet been worked out. I can't remember whether it was supposed to be Chou Enlai who said a similar thing about the French Revolution. For the Reformation, I'd say overall at the nearly 500 year mark it was a big win for civilization, but the intellectual working out of Protestantism seems to bid fair to kill us all in the end.
“at the apogee of Federal Republic of Germany’s power”
Clever, Steve. ‘Apogee’ moreso than ‘height’ implying a decline afterwards
That’s basically what I always figured–militarism’s attractive when you’re fighting wars all the time, and often losing, just due to the sheer number of neighbors you have.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
They keep losing wars, and didn’t have any overseas colonies.
For a while, it was substantially better to be conquered by Germany than Russia. Then Eastern Europeans got a surprise in WW2…
Merkel is the dominatrix of cuck-ified Germany. Slaves need masters. But I’m not laughing. We might get our own dominatrix, Hillary. These two fat, dumpy women should be grandmothers looking after their grandchildren. Instead they crave power and domination which is crazy for women their age. Its an abomination.
And how popular was the Frankfurt School before WWII? It went from an extremely small enclave to the ruling ideology of the West after WWII. That’s because white people devastated by war felt adopting it was their only hope for survival.
It is highly likely though that without WW2, PC would not have been as desirable for Jews to promote. The whole thing is a sad and sorry mess. What I want is to end this ridiculous open borders business and preferably a return to more 1980s type demographics. I am happy to forgive on this one. Ironically the promotion of PC has been an own goal by much of the liberal Jews, as they have mostly intermarried with Europeans. (Unless that is what they really wanted? I doubt it.)
Basically, there are only two choices facing any nation state with an intelligent population and an effective government, namely:
1/. Continuous (that is exponential) population growth - which despite all the shit you might read from certain, disreputable, sources is ecologically untenable and can only lead to a Malthusian mass die-off.
-or-
2/. Population control.
Now, I'm not claiming that option 2 is perfect and doesn't come with huge problems, but the point is that an intelligent ethny could manage those difficulties. The upshot is that as long as productivity levels improve by something meager, even something like 1 or 2% per annum, which has been the typical current level for decades, any potential loss due to that tired old fiction 'an ageing population' can be managed. Look at Italy. Somehow it manages to combine massive levels of youth unemployment - thanks to the shitheaded economic policies of the EU, combined with the continuous run of the smallest ever birth cohorts ever seen by any nation in recorded and unrecorded history. And yet, Italy is able to provide all her citizens with an 'adequate' standard of living.Replies: @Ozymandias, @Judah Benjamin Hur
You forgot to mention that, if you want a habitable planet to live on, you’ll need to force population control on the rest of the world as well.
That’s not intellectually honest. The Frankfurt School’s objectives were not put forward openly but pushed covertly by a long march through the institutions. And let’s be honest – a lot of influential Jews in the last century have thought that the objectives of the Frankfurt School were “good for the Jews” and have done a lot of work to promote them. The only reason we are having this conversation is because this is a corner of the web where mostly anonymous people with relatively smaller balls come to discuss what they notice on the site of a guy who puts his name to his writings and has a massive set of balls.
It is highly likely though that without WW2, PC would not have been as desirable for Jews to promote. The whole thing is a sad and sorry mess. What I want is to end this ridiculous open borders business and preferably a return to more 1980s type demographics. I am happy to forgive on this one. Ironically the promotion of PC has been an own goal by much of the liberal Jews, as they have mostly intermarried with Europeans. (Unless that is what they really wanted? I doubt it.)
“Eh, close enough.” – Homer Simpson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treehouse_of_Horror_V#Time_and_Punishment
Yes, they're very adept at playing the Nazi card. Which enrages me given Turkey's many, many crimes and Turks' persistent refusal to even admit them.Replies: @Bill B., @Anonymous, @AndrewR
“So these dark, ugly, neat little officials were the modern Turks. He listened to their voices, full of broad vowels and quiet sibilants and modified u-sounds, and he watched the dark eyes that belied the soft, polite voices. They were bright, angry, cruel eyes that had only lately come down from the mountains. Bond thought he knew the history of those eyes. They were eyes that had been trained for centuries to watch over sheep and decipher small movements on far horizons. They were eyes that kept the knife-hand in sight without seeming to, that counted the grains of meal and the small fractions of coin and noted the flicker of the merchant’s fingers. They were hard, untrusting, jealous eyes. Bond didn’t take to them…
“They love to be cursed and kicked. It is all they understand. It is in the blood. All this pretence of democracy is killing them. They want some sultans and wars and rape and fun. Poor brutes, in their striped suits and bowler hats. They are miserable. You’ve only got to look at them. However, to hell with them all. Any news?’
Bond shook his head. He told Kerim about the change of room and the untouched suitcase.”
Excerpt From: Fleming, Ian. “Bond 5 – From Russia with Love.” iBooks.
All of the German accomplishments could have
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don’t necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I’m fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here – they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it’s striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, “We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.”)
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn’t like the British conquest of Ireland – Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn’t help.
You need only hear a German shout (what’s with the shouting
anyway?) “…Raus!” once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It’s just one example of how the German
culture doesn’t appeal to women. I’ve met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don’t get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you’ll be getting
somewhere. That’s ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization – its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to women
that Germany never produced major skeptical philosophers.
Pessimists like Schopenhauer, yes; skeptics, no. Germany
never had its Descartes or David Hume. As a result, German
philosophy, indeed the whole culture became unbalanced.
It gave rise to people like Hegel (precursor of Marx) about whom
Betrand Russell famously said, "Not a single sentence in his philosophy
is true," and due to this pathological imbalance Germany
inflicted two antihuman philosophies of life on the world - Marxism
and Nazism - both of them violent and antidemocratic. Germany
is the only Western country that was too politically immature to grasp
the concept of democracy, it always insisted on its Sonderweg.
Democracy had to be rammed down its throat after WW I and WW II.
One gets the sense that Germans, like the Russians, prefer some
form of autocracy. E.g., how does Merkel get to stay in office for
so long?
Both of these pathological and anti-Christian philosophies
of life that Germany produced - Marxism and Nazism -
gave rise to rivers of blood in Europe and elsewhere. Someone
mentioned Lutheranism (1517) as a German contribution.
That's another ideology (religious this time) that produced
rivers of blood during the Religious Wars (1520-1648).
It'll be difficult for the Germans to shake the association
between Germany and rivers of blood. I know they are
trying to atone for their past sins, and I wish them all the best
but that kind of association is very hard to overcomeReplies: @SPMoore8, @V Vega, @random observer
Some years ago I decided to take German lessons did that for a year and a half. There were more women than men in the classes. The women in them were the most rude & arrogant shits I have ever come across - maybe future antipodean Merkels? I can't say what it was that motivated these types to learn German, as you couldn't have a conversation with them. The other women in it seemed to have one or two German grandparents who had died and had decided to pick up the language having not taken advantage of free linguistic lessons whilst grandparent(s) were alive.
Also it has clearly been a long time since Anon 2 visited Europe. These days Berlin is the cool place to be, after London. Paris is increasingly viewed as an uptight city overrun with dangerous immigrants. (Berlin is overrun too, but the immigrants are more "SWPL friendly.")Replies: @random observer, @Anon 2
Why don't you just say "I hate the Germans" and get done with it? That's what the other Poles here do as well without clogging up the comments with off topic rants.
culture doesn’t appeal to women. I’ve met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important."
That is because German is the ugliest sounding language out of all the European languages. The German language is about as sexy Honey Boo Boo's mother.
The German language is the Cantonese/Mandarin of Europe. That is how ugly it sounds.Replies: @anon, @SPMoore8
I’m uneasy with a sentence containing “Angela Merkel”, “Erdogan” and “jerking”. But it does kind of convey the real situation.
Basically, there are only two choices facing any nation state with an intelligent population and an effective government, namely:
1/. Continuous (that is exponential) population growth - which despite all the shit you might read from certain, disreputable, sources is ecologically untenable and can only lead to a Malthusian mass die-off.
-or-
2/. Population control.
Now, I'm not claiming that option 2 is perfect and doesn't come with huge problems, but the point is that an intelligent ethny could manage those difficulties. The upshot is that as long as productivity levels improve by something meager, even something like 1 or 2% per annum, which has been the typical current level for decades, any potential loss due to that tired old fiction 'an ageing population' can be managed. Look at Italy. Somehow it manages to combine massive levels of youth unemployment - thanks to the shitheaded economic policies of the EU, combined with the continuous run of the smallest ever birth cohorts ever seen by any nation in recorded and unrecorded history. And yet, Italy is able to provide all her citizens with an 'adequate' standard of living.Replies: @Ozymandias, @Judah Benjamin Hur
I’ll raise your “nonsense” with 2 “absurds!”
A fertility rate of 1.8 or 1.9, slightly below replacement, could be rationalized as “population control.” In the long run even that is not sustainable, but probably can be managed for several generations. However, under 1.5 can only be described as suicide. The fertility rate for ethnic Germans is 1.3.
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
Someone mentioned German philosophy. It’s interesting
that Germany never produced major skeptical philosophers.
Pessimists like Schopenhauer, yes; skeptics, no. Germany
never had its Descartes or David Hume. As a result, German
philosophy, indeed the whole culture became unbalanced.
It gave rise to people like Hegel (precursor of Marx) about whom
Betrand Russell famously said, “Not a single sentence in his philosophy
is true,” and due to this pathological imbalance Germany
inflicted two antihuman philosophies of life on the world – Marxism
and Nazism – both of them violent and antidemocratic. Germany
is the only Western country that was too politically immature to grasp
the concept of democracy, it always insisted on its Sonderweg.
Democracy had to be rammed down its throat after WW I and WW II.
One gets the sense that Germans, like the Russians, prefer some
form of autocracy. E.g., how does Merkel get to stay in office for
so long?
Both of these pathological and anti-Christian philosophies
of life that Germany produced – Marxism and Nazism –
gave rise to rivers of blood in Europe and elsewhere. Someone
mentioned Lutheranism (1517) as a German contribution.
That’s another ideology (religious this time) that produced
rivers of blood during the Religious Wars (1520-1648).
It’ll be difficult for the Germans to shake the association
between Germany and rivers of blood. I know they are
trying to atone for their past sins, and I wish them all the best
but that kind of association is very hard to overcome
I wouldn't call it A class trolling, but you obviously put a lot of effort into it. Best Regards!Replies: @Anon 2
I am insufficiently educated in philosophy to really articulate why, but I appreciate that even the most humane aspirations of German philosophy rub me, as many Anglos, the wrong way.
Something about the historicism, and the effort to systematize history into some sort of teleological structure, perhaps. By comparison, English Whiggism was a mere historiographical school and cultural tic. Perhaps it is the German philosophical attempt to adduce and describe a teleological structure to history without necessary reference to theology. I'd be prepared to accept history with a purpose, directed by God to his ends, presuming I believe in him. But the idea of systematic iron laws of history as essentially material constructs leaves me cold, both as undesirable and unlikely.
I also lack grounding in Hegel to fully understand his philosophy as it applies to law and government. The idea of the rechtsstaat [rechtstaat?] seems in many ways an ornament to civilization, but it's an idea of the rule of law that differs from the English concept of that name in ways I cannot quite put my mind to. Perhaps even differs from less philosophically structured continental concepts of law as the Roman and the French.
For what it's worth. I wouldn't want to be governed according to the principles of Chinese or Indian philosophy either, but I wouldn't deny either them or the Germans their place at the high table.Replies: @RadicalCenter
that Germany never produced major skeptical philosophers.
Pessimists like Schopenhauer, yes; skeptics, no. Germany
never had its Descartes or David Hume. As a result, German
philosophy, indeed the whole culture became unbalanced.
It gave rise to people like Hegel (precursor of Marx) about whom
Betrand Russell famously said, "Not a single sentence in his philosophy
is true," and due to this pathological imbalance Germany
inflicted two antihuman philosophies of life on the world - Marxism
and Nazism - both of them violent and antidemocratic. Germany
is the only Western country that was too politically immature to grasp
the concept of democracy, it always insisted on its Sonderweg.
Democracy had to be rammed down its throat after WW I and WW II.
One gets the sense that Germans, like the Russians, prefer some
form of autocracy. E.g., how does Merkel get to stay in office for
so long?
Both of these pathological and anti-Christian philosophies
of life that Germany produced - Marxism and Nazism -
gave rise to rivers of blood in Europe and elsewhere. Someone
mentioned Lutheranism (1517) as a German contribution.
That's another ideology (religious this time) that produced
rivers of blood during the Religious Wars (1520-1648).
It'll be difficult for the Germans to shake the association
between Germany and rivers of blood. I know they are
trying to atone for their past sins, and I wish them all the best
but that kind of association is very hard to overcomeReplies: @SPMoore8, @V Vega, @random observer
Let’s summarize these two posts: #1 – German philosophy stinks and made Germany crazy. #2 – Women don’t dig anything German. #3 – Just hearing someone say “Raus!” is a huge turnoff to having any regard for Germany or it’s language. #4 – Germany is responsible for all Central European wars, going back at least 500 years.
I wouldn’t call it A class trolling, but you obviously put a lot of effort into it. Best Regards!
British cultures because they are more balanced. Particularly,
France has more balance between the mind and the heart,
between Descartes and Pascal. Therefore, they are less likely
to go to extremes. My views of Germany are actually very
common in France, Poland, and Britain.
This sort of view has a long pedigree. After all, it was Aristotle
who defined virtue as the mean between two extremes. What
I would recommend to the Germans is to focus more on great
food and great wine instead of lusting after someone else's
territory. Imitate Holland and Czechia - they are small and yet
more balanced. Germany's material growth is excessive, and is at
the expense of life. Specifically, its GDP per capita is too high
(even worse, it's inflated by enormous arms exports). I recommend
a book called Biocentrism by Robert Lanza, M.D.Replies: @Anonym
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
Interesting reading on your second part of the post. I will respectfully beg to differ on some points you made – I like the sound of the German language – might be some ancestral thing, (paternal great grandparents) – even the shouting.
Some years ago I decided to take German lessons did that for a year and a half. There were more women than men in the classes. The women in them were the most rude & arrogant shits I have ever come across – maybe future antipodean Merkels? I can’t say what it was that motivated these types to learn German, as you couldn’t have a conversation with them. The other women in it seemed to have one or two German grandparents who had died and had decided to pick up the language having not taken advantage of free linguistic lessons whilst grandparent(s) were alive.
“They love to be cursed and kicked. It is all they understand. It is in the blood. All this pretence of democracy is killing them. They want some sultans and wars and rape and fun. Poor brutes, in their striped suits and bowler hats. They are miserable. You've only got to look at them. However, to hell with them all. Any news?'
Bond shook his head. He told Kerim about the change of room and the untouched suitcase.”
Excerpt From: Fleming, Ian. “Bond 5 - From Russia with Love.” iBooks.Replies: @Clyde
What great insightful writing! I should try and get it and read it
I wouldn't call it A class trolling, but you obviously put a lot of effort into it. Best Regards!Replies: @Anon 2
I have a great deal of admiration for the French and
British cultures because they are more balanced. Particularly,
France has more balance between the mind and the heart,
between Descartes and Pascal. Therefore, they are less likely
to go to extremes. My views of Germany are actually very
common in France, Poland, and Britain.
This sort of view has a long pedigree. After all, it was Aristotle
who defined virtue as the mean between two extremes. What
I would recommend to the Germans is to focus more on great
food and great wine instead of lusting after someone else’s
territory. Imitate Holland and Czechia – they are small and yet
more balanced. Germany’s material growth is excessive, and is at
the expense of life. Specifically, its GDP per capita is too high
(even worse, it’s inflated by enormous arms exports). I recommend
a book called Biocentrism by Robert Lanza, M.D.
British cultures because they are more balanced. Particularly,
France has more balance between the mind and the heart,
between Descartes and Pascal. Therefore, they are less likely
to go to extremes. My views of Germany are actually very
common in France, Poland, and Britain.
French are quite balanced as long as they are not ruled by Corsicans.
The reason that we only remark about old, childless women in power being a problem is that its converse, the guy who can’t get laid, becomes a moot point once they get power because power is the ultimate aphrodisiac, to quote Kissinger.
Of course, if they can’t conceive a son or any heir at all, that in itself can be maddening. See Henry VIII. This is not as relevant in these days of democratically elected leaders. Regardless, male heads of state don’t want for female companionship.
that Germany never produced major skeptical philosophers.
Pessimists like Schopenhauer, yes; skeptics, no. Germany
never had its Descartes or David Hume. As a result, German
philosophy, indeed the whole culture became unbalanced.
It gave rise to people like Hegel (precursor of Marx) about whom
Betrand Russell famously said, "Not a single sentence in his philosophy
is true," and due to this pathological imbalance Germany
inflicted two antihuman philosophies of life on the world - Marxism
and Nazism - both of them violent and antidemocratic. Germany
is the only Western country that was too politically immature to grasp
the concept of democracy, it always insisted on its Sonderweg.
Democracy had to be rammed down its throat after WW I and WW II.
One gets the sense that Germans, like the Russians, prefer some
form of autocracy. E.g., how does Merkel get to stay in office for
so long?
Both of these pathological and anti-Christian philosophies
of life that Germany produced - Marxism and Nazism -
gave rise to rivers of blood in Europe and elsewhere. Someone
mentioned Lutheranism (1517) as a German contribution.
That's another ideology (religious this time) that produced
rivers of blood during the Religious Wars (1520-1648).
It'll be difficult for the Germans to shake the association
between Germany and rivers of blood. I know they are
trying to atone for their past sins, and I wish them all the best
but that kind of association is very hard to overcomeReplies: @SPMoore8, @V Vega, @random observer
Karl Marx was pretty darned jewish. That trumps nationalism almost every time. His grandfather was a Rabbi! His mother was, by most accounts, a nutty jewish mom. I mention this because Marx was hardly the prototypical German. Hardly of Prussian stock.
Germany’s problem with the Poles to this day may be related to the many Polish Krystalnacht events prior to WWII. Poles were attacking ethnic Germans, their businesses, even their homes, so much so, that over 80,000 german refugees were piling up on Germany’s borders just prior to WWII. We can presume that the french and the brit’s oath to defend them gave them some balls back in the day. Likely a lot of German’s haven’t forgotten about the Poles. When Germany invaded Poland, in their minds, they had pretty good reason.
Another fact to keep in mind regarding the Germans. Their location on the map between Russia and western Europe pretty much made them akin to Fort Apache.
What is the poetic allusion of Fort Apache? It’s the last step before hell on earth for the civilized. They were the only capable country standing between Stalin and western Europe. If Mexico decided to sign off as a protected state of the new soviet union, with “defensive” troops piling up along our border, you can bet our military attitude would change dramatically. Viewed from western europe, I believe we would quickly appear to be quite martial in temperment.
That is, we’d turn into the goose-steppin’est mother fuckers in this Hemisphere.
Also, as it’s hard to smell your own breath, it’s also difficult for Americans to conceive of how obnoxious our language may sound to other countries, but it’s interesting to note that a significant amount of the common words we use are of German derivation.
Furthermore, any average american who visits London, then visits Berlin, might be surprised to find out that we tend to get along better, and have more in common with Germans, than we do the Brits. Drinking great beer, technical nerdstuff, dark sense of humor, valuing people over things: that’s German. Before you say “people? really?” remember Hitler allowed Churchill to carpet bomb German citizens for months without reprisals, as well as allowing the brits to turn tail and run at Dunkirk, when he could have easily annihilated every last one of them, and with all of Churchill’s carpet bombing of civilian targets by then, nobody would have blamed him.
I will concede his “mick jaggering” around Europe prior to Poland certainly made his neighbor’s hearts beat faster–except Poland. Hitler was in a bubble, and getting physically weaker by the day. By 1941, he was running on fumes, and he knew it. If he’d had a heart attack before Barbarossa, things might have played out for the better, for everyone. Goering was next in command, and he was not a fan of the Russia escapade. The first thing he said when war was declared by the brits: “if we don’t win this war, god have mercy on us!”
WWII was a clusterfuck, like all modern wars. It’s not really fair to delineate the German people as the all around bad guys of western europe. Churchill was a fascist piece of shit too. Ask any Indian how he took care of business back in the day. He loved poison gas. It’s the only weapon he didn’t get to use on Germany, even though his factories were piling up the toxic ordinance throughout WWII for what would have been the best day in Churchill’s life, by Churchill’s value system. And let’s not forget his tossing all Jewish refugee’s from Germany into concentration camps, and stopping all food from the Red Cross from reaching concentration camps in France. A decent amount of Jews died of starvation there, thanks to Saint Churchill.
Besides, I never liked that foppish better-than-you brit accent, myself. Makes me want to punch ’em in their cross-toothed face. Hitler was a better man than me, in that respect. The minute I ever saw a brit plane on my side of the border, I’d be fire-bombing Big Ben 5 minutes later. The brit parliament 5 minutes after that. I’d fry ’em like fish. Then I’d drop chips on them for the poetry.
When all the accounting is done, the Germans were assholes, but no bigger assholes than any of the other major players. Until the majority accepts that, it’s always going to be wacky in Europe.
British cultures because they are more balanced. Particularly,
France has more balance between the mind and the heart,
between Descartes and Pascal. Therefore, they are less likely
to go to extremes. My views of Germany are actually very
common in France, Poland, and Britain.
This sort of view has a long pedigree. After all, it was Aristotle
who defined virtue as the mean between two extremes. What
I would recommend to the Germans is to focus more on great
food and great wine instead of lusting after someone else's
territory. Imitate Holland and Czechia - they are small and yet
more balanced. Germany's material growth is excessive, and is at
the expense of life. Specifically, its GDP per capita is too high
(even worse, it's inflated by enormous arms exports). I recommend
a book called Biocentrism by Robert Lanza, M.D.Replies: @Anonym
I have a great deal of admiration for the French and
British cultures because they are more balanced. Particularly,
France has more balance between the mind and the heart,
between Descartes and Pascal. Therefore, they are less likely
to go to extremes. My views of Germany are actually very
common in France, Poland, and Britain.
French are quite balanced as long as they are not ruled by Corsicans.
The reason why "German civilization" is not more noticeable worldwide is because (1) Germany never really had any substantial colonies to impose its language (although parts of Eastern Europe, including much of present day Poland (and virtually all of its architecture), Czechia (whatever), and the Baltics were "German colonies".) (2) Germans assimilate very readily into non-German speaking countries.
Speaking of German contributions to the arts and sciences, I think we should at least tip our hats to them in the realm of theology: there was this thing called the Reformation, after all.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @random observer
What about England? Or rather, “Engla land”, “the land of the Angles”.
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
Sounds like some sort of tribal hatred towards Germans there…
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
“One of the largest”? Who are the other ones? Who is the largest?
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
More like they didn’t put enough energy into military expansionism, then.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
Paris syndrome hits Japanese
And who is responsible for their current cucked state?
Naval expansion is more fun than ground combat expansion. The British are a race of pirates, and yo ho, yo ho, a pirate’s life for me.
So Merkel's decision by itself could be justifiable. But the speech the woman gave, was disgusting with its bizarre pro-Turkish platitudes...Turkey is our "friend and partner", NATO ally and prospective EU member, and there are close ties between the countries because of millions of Turks living in Germany...when an honest asessment would be that large-scale Turkish immigration to Germany was a costly mistake and that Turkey is a deeply unpleasant country with a history extending to the present of persecuting minorities and causing trouble in its neighbourhood (think Cyprus, now Syria), and that a large percentage of its population are Islamists and/or ultra-nationalists. It was an embarrassing display...typical German politician cringe mode.Replies: @Erik Sieven, @Anonymous Nephew, @No_0ne
While Böhmermann’s type of satire seems inappropriate for a state broadcaster, in the US, this would be an issue for his employers, or perhaps grounds for a civil (slander) case. The criminal case sounds excessive.
On the other hand, from a tactical, rather than principled, standpoint, he looks like a very deserving target.
I’m a little surprised that Böhmermann apparently thought that he would get away with such an over the top attack on a member of an official victim group (Muslim). Did he think his leftist status would protect him? Or something else?
Lefties in Germany are critical of Erdogan, but they mostly limit their criticism to things like his actions against civil liberties, oppression of Kurds or retrograde views of women. They avoid directly facing the crucial issue that Erdogan is an Islamist with virulently anti-Western views and a supporter of groups like the Muslim brothers in Egypt, Hamas and jihadis in Syria, and that a large percentage of Turks shares Erdogan's world view. Basically they want to criticise Erdogan as a "right-winger" who doesn't share their progressive views (sort of like they view Putin), but refuse to seriously deal with his Islamist world view because that would conflict with their pro-Islamic multiculturalism and pro-Turkish antiracism (German comedians would never mock or ridicule Turks for voting for Erdogan, whereas they have no such scruples about Poles voting for PiS).
Böhmermann is part of that idiot leftie mainstream, it wouldn't even have occurred to him to view mocking Erdogan as an attack on Muslims.
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
If you want to use German culture to appeal to women use Mozart, Rilke, Stefan George, Klimt, and Schubert. Served up with a Sachertorte and a Kaffee mit Schlag. Habsburg Germans are beloved by women. Given the two poles between Prussia and Austria it is hard to think of a culture more balanced than the German.
Also it has clearly been a long time since Anon 2 visited Europe. These days Berlin is the cool place to be, after London. Paris is increasingly viewed as an uptight city overrun with dangerous immigrants. (Berlin is overrun too, but the immigrants are more “SWPL friendly.”)
Of course, technically, Prussia as a separate state
hasn't existed since 1871 but much of its former
territory has been incorporated into Germany,
and much of its spirit still persists as a heavy
oppressive presence in eastern Germany. Get out
of Berlin - just like Moscow is completely unrepre-
sentative of Russia, Berlin is unrepresentative of
eastern Germany. Visit some former concentration
camps, e.g., Buchenwald, to get a more realistic
appraisal of German history.
Austria may be German speaking but it's a completely
different country. There is no such thing as Hapsburg
Germans. The examples you give are mostly from
Vienna which was a great center of culture for at least
200 years, Catholic and hence full of joie de vivre and
spontaneity, but that's not Germany. Vienna was also
the home of my favorite economist, Leopold Kohr, the
author of Kohr principles (e.g., Size is the root of all evil).
I always have a wonderful time in Vienna but then who
doesn't like Mitteleuropa?
When I speak of Europe, I always have in mind the years
prior to 2015. A friend of mine told me that the best present
he could offer his wife would be a month spent together
in Paris. She has no interest in Berlin but then she's Dutch,
and the Dutch suffered significantly during the last German
occupation.
At least in the U.S., the interest in the study of German is
slowly dying. Our college students are now much more interested
in Chinese and Japanese. However, French is still very
popular and continues to be taught at the high school level.
Girls love it! After WW II German lost its historic chance to be a world
language to English, and is not going to get that chance againReplies: @RadicalCenter, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon
Even if your extremely tendentious claims were true, it wouldn’t be the same century. But then, don’t let some basic math get in the way of anti-German resentment.
https://www.google.com.br/search?q=slovenia+migrants&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSjAEaiQELEKjU2AQaAggADAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIo9R3xFK4e9B39CqUezxemHq4Y7xT-PsE59Dn6PtUr0yvYOcA5qzmiORowq0JZY3CAx6Q6NQDJLz0jVNydAXcIF0PiGT0D6DFT3bQXpGBKmsjU-er0mis53XzmIAMMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgSjY1GYDA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj39fbrnZjMAhWMHZAKHeuOBuoQwg4IGigA&biw=688&bih=575&dpr=1.5#imgrc=YI4J2ljkkNygbM%3A
Not the leader of Germany? Which Germans for some reason have zero resposiblity for. Just like it was only Hilter and not Germans. Pff. Germans time and time again have been exposed as psychopaths. By the way, not Jewish. Just sick of German cuckoldry destroying my ancestral continents homeland.Replies: @anon, @Anonymous
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
So much sophistry just to declare your ethnic bias against the Germans. A lot of claims which can neither be proven nor unproven, because they are based on your own arbitrary metrics and value judgments.
Why don’t you just say “I hate the Germans” and get done with it? That’s what the other Poles here do as well without clogging up the comments with off topic rants.
Themselves. Jews are an incredible people. But they can´t force anything that isn´t wanted.
My German prejudice caused this I suppose:
https://www.google.com.br/search?q=slovenia+migrants&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSjAEaiQELEKjU2AQaAggADAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIo9R3xFK4e9B39CqUezxemHq4Y7xT-PsE59Dn6PtUr0yvYOcA5qzmiORowq0JZY3CAx6Q6NQDJLz0jVNydAXcIF0PiGT0D6DFT3bQXpGBKmsjU-er0mis53XzmIAMMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgSjY1GYDA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj39fbrnZjMAhWMHZAKHeuOBuoQwg4IGigA&biw=688&bih=575&dpr=1.5#imgrc=YI4J2ljkkNygbM%3A
Not the leader of Germany? Which Germans for some reason have zero resposiblity for. Just like it was only Hilter and not Germans. Pff. Germans time and time again have been exposed as psychopaths. By the way, not Jewish. Just sick of German cuckoldry destroying my ancestral continents homeland.
Yes, they're very adept at playing the Nazi card. Which enrages me given Turkey's many, many crimes and Turks' persistent refusal to even admit them.Replies: @Bill B., @Anonymous, @AndrewR
You should take up the cause of becoming an Armenian activist against Turkish oppression to limit Turkish nationalism instead of spending so much time whining about the state of Germany.
The reason why "German civilization" is not more noticeable worldwide is because (1) Germany never really had any substantial colonies to impose its language (although parts of Eastern Europe, including much of present day Poland (and virtually all of its architecture), Czechia (whatever), and the Baltics were "German colonies".) (2) Germans assimilate very readily into non-German speaking countries.
Speaking of German contributions to the arts and sciences, I think we should at least tip our hats to them in the realm of theology: there was this thing called the Reformation, after all.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @random observer
Quite right and agreed on all counts. I gave short shrift to science and theology both.
It would be pretty hard to either easily summarize or overstate the contributions of the German people to advancement in the sciences, particularly physics, chemistry, and all derivative engineering disciplines. We’d be nowhere without the contributions of 19th century and early 20th century Germany.
I’d agree on theology, but I’m not convinced all the pros and cons of the Reformation have yet been worked out. I can’t remember whether it was supposed to be Chou Enlai who said a similar thing about the French Revolution. For the Reformation, I’d say overall at the nearly 500 year mark it was a big win for civilization, but the intellectual working out of Protestantism seems to bid fair to kill us all in the end.
that Germany never produced major skeptical philosophers.
Pessimists like Schopenhauer, yes; skeptics, no. Germany
never had its Descartes or David Hume. As a result, German
philosophy, indeed the whole culture became unbalanced.
It gave rise to people like Hegel (precursor of Marx) about whom
Betrand Russell famously said, "Not a single sentence in his philosophy
is true," and due to this pathological imbalance Germany
inflicted two antihuman philosophies of life on the world - Marxism
and Nazism - both of them violent and antidemocratic. Germany
is the only Western country that was too politically immature to grasp
the concept of democracy, it always insisted on its Sonderweg.
Democracy had to be rammed down its throat after WW I and WW II.
One gets the sense that Germans, like the Russians, prefer some
form of autocracy. E.g., how does Merkel get to stay in office for
so long?
Both of these pathological and anti-Christian philosophies
of life that Germany produced - Marxism and Nazism -
gave rise to rivers of blood in Europe and elsewhere. Someone
mentioned Lutheranism (1517) as a German contribution.
That's another ideology (religious this time) that produced
rivers of blood during the Religious Wars (1520-1648).
It'll be difficult for the Germans to shake the association
between Germany and rivers of blood. I know they are
trying to atone for their past sins, and I wish them all the best
but that kind of association is very hard to overcomeReplies: @SPMoore8, @V Vega, @random observer
That seems a little harsh.
I am insufficiently educated in philosophy to really articulate why, but I appreciate that even the most humane aspirations of German philosophy rub me, as many Anglos, the wrong way.
Something about the historicism, and the effort to systematize history into some sort of teleological structure, perhaps. By comparison, English Whiggism was a mere historiographical school and cultural tic. Perhaps it is the German philosophical attempt to adduce and describe a teleological structure to history without necessary reference to theology. I’d be prepared to accept history with a purpose, directed by God to his ends, presuming I believe in him. But the idea of systematic iron laws of history as essentially material constructs leaves me cold, both as undesirable and unlikely.
I also lack grounding in Hegel to fully understand his philosophy as it applies to law and government. The idea of the rechtsstaat [rechtstaat?] seems in many ways an ornament to civilization, but it’s an idea of the rule of law that differs from the English concept of that name in ways I cannot quite put my mind to. Perhaps even differs from less philosophically structured continental concepts of law as the Roman and the French.
For what it’s worth. I wouldn’t want to be governed according to the principles of Chinese or Indian philosophy either, but I wouldn’t deny either them or the Germans their place at the high table.
India, Germany, and Brazil should get permanent seats on the UN Security Council.
Also it has clearly been a long time since Anon 2 visited Europe. These days Berlin is the cool place to be, after London. Paris is increasingly viewed as an uptight city overrun with dangerous immigrants. (Berlin is overrun too, but the immigrants are more "SWPL friendly.")Replies: @random observer, @Anon 2
I can think of at least four Canadian women I know well who react to German culture pretty much the same way those Japanese in the post above develop Paris syndrome. For a mix of traditional [language, art, culture, food, gemutlichkeit] and modern [Berlin is super hip] reasons.
It’s definitely been a thing for at least the last decade or so.
On the other hand, from a tactical, rather than principled, standpoint, he looks like a very deserving target.
I'm a little surprised that Böhmermann apparently thought that he would get away with such an over the top attack on a member of an official victim group (Muslim). Did he think his leftist status would protect him? Or something else?Replies: @German_reader
“I’m a little surprised that Böhmermann apparently thought that he would get away with such an over the top attack on a member of an official victim group (Muslim). ”
Lefties in Germany are critical of Erdogan, but they mostly limit their criticism to things like his actions against civil liberties, oppression of Kurds or retrograde views of women. They avoid directly facing the crucial issue that Erdogan is an Islamist with virulently anti-Western views and a supporter of groups like the Muslim brothers in Egypt, Hamas and jihadis in Syria, and that a large percentage of Turks shares Erdogan’s world view. Basically they want to criticise Erdogan as a “right-winger” who doesn’t share their progressive views (sort of like they view Putin), but refuse to seriously deal with his Islamist world view because that would conflict with their pro-Islamic multiculturalism and pro-Turkish antiracism (German comedians would never mock or ridicule Turks for voting for Erdogan, whereas they have no such scruples about Poles voting for PiS).
Böhmermann is part of that idiot leftie mainstream, it wouldn’t even have occurred to him to view mocking Erdogan as an attack on Muslims.
A unite Europe can easily stop this foreign invasion. This is a task the EU can easily do. Someone wants to destroy the EU. The Russians and the United States both would see a unite Europe as an economic and military competitor. The question I have is who is subverting the EU? Russia or the USA?
Yes, they're very adept at playing the Nazi card. Which enrages me given Turkey's many, many crimes and Turks' persistent refusal to even admit them.Replies: @Bill B., @Anonymous, @AndrewR
The Nazi card only has power because the Germans let it. To the extent anyone should be able to use it, it shouldn’t be the Turks, especially given their own blatant genocide denial.
Also it has clearly been a long time since Anon 2 visited Europe. These days Berlin is the cool place to be, after London. Paris is increasingly viewed as an uptight city overrun with dangerous immigrants. (Berlin is overrun too, but the immigrants are more "SWPL friendly.")Replies: @random observer, @Anon 2
Berlin, the former capital of Prussia, is in Germany.
Of course, technically, Prussia as a separate state
hasn’t existed since 1871 but much of its former
territory has been incorporated into Germany,
and much of its spirit still persists as a heavy
oppressive presence in eastern Germany. Get out
of Berlin – just like Moscow is completely unrepre-
sentative of Russia, Berlin is unrepresentative of
eastern Germany. Visit some former concentration
camps, e.g., Buchenwald, to get a more realistic
appraisal of German history.
Austria may be German speaking but it’s a completely
different country. There is no such thing as Hapsburg
Germans. The examples you give are mostly from
Vienna which was a great center of culture for at least
200 years, Catholic and hence full of joie de vivre and
spontaneity, but that’s not Germany. Vienna was also
the home of my favorite economist, Leopold Kohr, the
author of Kohr principles (e.g., Size is the root of all evil).
I always have a wonderful time in Vienna but then who
doesn’t like Mitteleuropa?
When I speak of Europe, I always have in mind the years
prior to 2015. A friend of mine told me that the best present
he could offer his wife would be a month spent together
in Paris. She has no interest in Berlin but then she’s Dutch,
and the Dutch suffered significantly during the last German
occupation.
At least in the U.S., the interest in the study of German is
slowly dying. Our college students are now much more interested
in Chinese and Japanese. However, French is still very
popular and continues to be taught at the high school level.
Girls love it! After WW II German lost its historic chance to be a world
language to English, and is not going to get that chance again
While we may not be typical, our children are learning German from a young age, and we plan to have them learn Spanish and Mandarin after that. Never even considered having them learn French.
We considered having them learn Japanese, and still wouldn't rule it out. But Japan seems likely to suffer a massive population decline, and a country typically simply can't maintain its same military and/or economic size and power when its population drops substantially and there is no end in sight to the drop. Same consideration made us reluctant to have them learn Russian.
On the other hand, the way things are going, what kind of Germany will our children encounter 15-20 years from now? If it is an increasingly African, Arab and Muslim country, that's not what we identify with, it's not what we want to support, and it's not what we want for our children and grandchildren. Hoping they wake up in time. Hoping we do too.Replies: @SPMoore8
been expected centuries ago if only because of
first, huge population advantage over its neighbors
(80 million vs. 60 million in France and only 40
million in Poland). Moreover, there are 100 million
German speakers in Europe which introduces
economies of scale. Plus the Germans feel kinship
with their fellow Germanics in Scandinavia which
facilitates scholarly exchange. An example would be
the closeness between Werner Heisenberg and Niels
Bohr in the 1920s. No such scholarly exchange existed
between Germany and Poland. As recently as 1920s
and 1930s German universities refused to accept doctoral
students from Poland. This hostility toward Poland is
one reason why Maria Sklodowska-Curie went to study
in France, and not in Germany. I hear that even today
if a store is opened in Berlin and displays any sign of Polish
ownership, the chances are its windows will be broken
overnight by German skinheads.
Secondly, Germany is close to the major centers of
European civilization in Paris and London. Civilization
came from Italy and France so Germany was delayed
in its progress but not by much. I don't necessarily
believe that geography is destiny but geography plus
demography are definitely the first two terms in the power
series approximation to our understanding of history.
I'm fully aware of all the German accomplishments mentioned
here - they stem from the population and location advantages.
Nevertheless, it's striking how on the global scale Germany
punches below its weight in terms of its prestige and its brand.
How did the Germans manage to become so intensely disliked?
(except by Syrians! A Syrian migrant interviewed last fall on the
way north said, "We love the Germans because of they did to the Jews.")
I traveled extensively in Germany, I know its history . My impression
is that 80% of its energy in its 1200-year history went toward Drang
nach Osten and the pursuit of Lebensraum, mainly toward the
conquest of Poland. Frederick the Great of Prussia and Catherine
the Great of Russia who both initiated the First Partition of Poland
in 1772, were both Germans. This act of military expansionism
destabilized Europe and arguably was a precursor to World War I.
When 80% of your energy goes toward military expansionism
(and it wasn't like the British conquest of Ireland - Poland was no
small country), it cannot help but warp your psyche toward
barbarism. The harshness of the German language doesn't help.
You need only hear a German shout (what's with the shouting
anyway?) "...Raus!" once to instantly lose any interest in the German
culture or language. It's just one example of how the German
culture doesn't appeal to women. I've met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important. You
don't get women on your side by talking about war and missiles and
quantum mechanics or even Beethoven. But talk to them about
ballet, Tschaikovsky, Debussy, French poetry (remember Bill Murray in
Groundhog Day?), or French Impressionism,and you'll be getting
somewhere. That's ultimately why Germany failed to create a great
civilization - its whole orientation is too harsh, too militaristic, too
arrogant to appeal to womenReplies: @Anon 2, @The Albino Sasquatch, @No_0ne, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon, @Jefferson
“It’s just one example of how the German
culture doesn’t appeal to women. I’ve met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important.”
That is because German is the ugliest sounding language out of all the European languages. The German language is about as sexy Honey Boo Boo’s mother.
The German language is the Cantonese/Mandarin of Europe. That is how ugly it sounds.
UTTERLY agreed.
Of course, if they can't conceive a son or any heir at all, that in itself can be maddening. See Henry VIII. This is not as relevant in these days of democratically elected leaders. Regardless, male heads of state don't want for female companionship.Replies: @RadicalCenter
Good points. But I’d add that part of our problem may be that some FEMALE heads of state don’t want for FEMALE companionship — certainly Hillary Clinton (oh humma-humma-Huma) and perhaps Angela Merkel as well. They are emotionally and psychologically troubled and immature, and the perverse, confused non-reproductive sexuality is just a symptom.
I am insufficiently educated in philosophy to really articulate why, but I appreciate that even the most humane aspirations of German philosophy rub me, as many Anglos, the wrong way.
Something about the historicism, and the effort to systematize history into some sort of teleological structure, perhaps. By comparison, English Whiggism was a mere historiographical school and cultural tic. Perhaps it is the German philosophical attempt to adduce and describe a teleological structure to history without necessary reference to theology. I'd be prepared to accept history with a purpose, directed by God to his ends, presuming I believe in him. But the idea of systematic iron laws of history as essentially material constructs leaves me cold, both as undesirable and unlikely.
I also lack grounding in Hegel to fully understand his philosophy as it applies to law and government. The idea of the rechtsstaat [rechtstaat?] seems in many ways an ornament to civilization, but it's an idea of the rule of law that differs from the English concept of that name in ways I cannot quite put my mind to. Perhaps even differs from less philosophically structured continental concepts of law as the Roman and the French.
For what it's worth. I wouldn't want to be governed according to the principles of Chinese or Indian philosophy either, but I wouldn't deny either them or the Germans their place at the high table.Replies: @RadicalCenter
Speaking of a “place at the high table”, if the United Nations is not going to be abolished — which seems highly unlikely at the moment — then the Security Council must be expanded.
India, Germany, and Brazil should get permanent seats on the UN Security Council.
Of course, technically, Prussia as a separate state
hasn't existed since 1871 but much of its former
territory has been incorporated into Germany,
and much of its spirit still persists as a heavy
oppressive presence in eastern Germany. Get out
of Berlin - just like Moscow is completely unrepre-
sentative of Russia, Berlin is unrepresentative of
eastern Germany. Visit some former concentration
camps, e.g., Buchenwald, to get a more realistic
appraisal of German history.
Austria may be German speaking but it's a completely
different country. There is no such thing as Hapsburg
Germans. The examples you give are mostly from
Vienna which was a great center of culture for at least
200 years, Catholic and hence full of joie de vivre and
spontaneity, but that's not Germany. Vienna was also
the home of my favorite economist, Leopold Kohr, the
author of Kohr principles (e.g., Size is the root of all evil).
I always have a wonderful time in Vienna but then who
doesn't like Mitteleuropa?
When I speak of Europe, I always have in mind the years
prior to 2015. A friend of mine told me that the best present
he could offer his wife would be a month spent together
in Paris. She has no interest in Berlin but then she's Dutch,
and the Dutch suffered significantly during the last German
occupation.
At least in the U.S., the interest in the study of German is
slowly dying. Our college students are now much more interested
in Chinese and Japanese. However, French is still very
popular and continues to be taught at the high school level.
Girls love it! After WW II German lost its historic chance to be a world
language to English, and is not going to get that chance againReplies: @RadicalCenter, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon
Interesting observation about which languages U.S. kids are learning, or not learning, nowadays.
While we may not be typical, our children are learning German from a young age, and we plan to have them learn Spanish and Mandarin after that. Never even considered having them learn French.
We considered having them learn Japanese, and still wouldn’t rule it out. But Japan seems likely to suffer a massive population decline, and a country typically simply can’t maintain its same military and/or economic size and power when its population drops substantially and there is no end in sight to the drop. Same consideration made us reluctant to have them learn Russian.
On the other hand, the way things are going, what kind of Germany will our children encounter 15-20 years from now? If it is an increasingly African, Arab and Muslim country, that’s not what we identify with, it’s not what we want to support, and it’s not what we want for our children and grandchildren. Hoping they wake up in time. Hoping we do too.
But I would also recommend a reading ability in French, which, fortunately, is not that hard to acquire.
Conversational German or Russian (or virtually any language) is not that hard to acquire. However, for study or research those languages will always be important (assuming one has any interest in the 19th and early 20th centuries), regardless of their populations.
Of course, technically, Prussia as a separate state
hasn't existed since 1871 but much of its former
territory has been incorporated into Germany,
and much of its spirit still persists as a heavy
oppressive presence in eastern Germany. Get out
of Berlin - just like Moscow is completely unrepre-
sentative of Russia, Berlin is unrepresentative of
eastern Germany. Visit some former concentration
camps, e.g., Buchenwald, to get a more realistic
appraisal of German history.
Austria may be German speaking but it's a completely
different country. There is no such thing as Hapsburg
Germans. The examples you give are mostly from
Vienna which was a great center of culture for at least
200 years, Catholic and hence full of joie de vivre and
spontaneity, but that's not Germany. Vienna was also
the home of my favorite economist, Leopold Kohr, the
author of Kohr principles (e.g., Size is the root of all evil).
I always have a wonderful time in Vienna but then who
doesn't like Mitteleuropa?
When I speak of Europe, I always have in mind the years
prior to 2015. A friend of mine told me that the best present
he could offer his wife would be a month spent together
in Paris. She has no interest in Berlin but then she's Dutch,
and the Dutch suffered significantly during the last German
occupation.
At least in the U.S., the interest in the study of German is
slowly dying. Our college students are now much more interested
in Chinese and Japanese. However, French is still very
popular and continues to be taught at the high school level.
Girls love it! After WW II German lost its historic chance to be a world
language to English, and is not going to get that chance againReplies: @RadicalCenter, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon
Come on. You must know enough German history to realize how ridiculous that sounds. If you want to talk about German culture writ large you have to talk about the historical German lands not the modern Federal Republic of Germany, which culturally and historically is essentially the descendant of the Prussian state.
Prussia, had their origin in the vast Holy Roman Empire.
However, 1. After the Reformation, the Hapsburg lands
that have remained Catholic and the Protestant lands to the
north began to diverge from each other culturally, 2. As the
Hapsburgs expanded their territory, their lands became
so multiethnic that the imperial edicts had to be published
in 8 different languages. This is precisely what bothered
Hitler about Austria, and was one of the reasons why he
moved to Germany. I said Austria is a completely different
country because of those two factors: it has a Catholic heritage
and has been much more multiethnic than northern Germany.
Northern Germans never had to publish their edicts in 8
languages.
Of course, these days Germany is v. multiethnic so when I
refer to Germany I mean Germany before the influx of the
Turks and other minorities.
I assume you're Russian and therefore Eastern Orthodox, so
perhaps you're not aware of all the subtle cultural differences
between Catholicism and Lutheranism (even though the
theological differences may be minor). One of them is the
veneration of the Virgin Mary which makes Catholic lands
like Austria, Poland, and France more woman-friendly, e.g.,
efficiency is not the primary value, relationships are valued
as well. Of course, Bavaria is also Catholic but Germany to
me has a Protestant feel because it has been dominated by
Prussia for so long, and that's how native Germans defend
Germany. They say western and southern Germany were
fine until their culture was hijacked by "evil militaristic
Prussia." And that's a valid point.
https://www.google.com.br/search?q=slovenia+migrants&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSjAEaiQELEKjU2AQaAggADAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIo9R3xFK4e9B39CqUezxemHq4Y7xT-PsE59Dn6PtUr0yvYOcA5qzmiORowq0JZY3CAx6Q6NQDJLz0jVNydAXcIF0PiGT0D6DFT3bQXpGBKmsjU-er0mis53XzmIAMMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgSjY1GYDA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj39fbrnZjMAhWMHZAKHeuOBuoQwg4IGigA&biw=688&bih=575&dpr=1.5#imgrc=YI4J2ljkkNygbM%3A
Not the leader of Germany? Which Germans for some reason have zero resposiblity for. Just like it was only Hilter and not Germans. Pff. Germans time and time again have been exposed as psychopaths. By the way, not Jewish. Just sick of German cuckoldry destroying my ancestral continents homeland.Replies: @anon, @Anonymous
Incoherent garbage. The only thing that is exposed by your comments is your own mental unhingedness.
culture doesn’t appeal to women. I’ve met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important."
That is because German is the ugliest sounding language out of all the European languages. The German language is about as sexy Honey Boo Boo's mother.
The German language is the Cantonese/Mandarin of Europe. That is how ugly it sounds.Replies: @anon, @SPMoore8
Yeah, we love you, too.
Of course, technically, Prussia as a separate state
hasn't existed since 1871 but much of its former
territory has been incorporated into Germany,
and much of its spirit still persists as a heavy
oppressive presence in eastern Germany. Get out
of Berlin - just like Moscow is completely unrepre-
sentative of Russia, Berlin is unrepresentative of
eastern Germany. Visit some former concentration
camps, e.g., Buchenwald, to get a more realistic
appraisal of German history.
Austria may be German speaking but it's a completely
different country. There is no such thing as Hapsburg
Germans. The examples you give are mostly from
Vienna which was a great center of culture for at least
200 years, Catholic and hence full of joie de vivre and
spontaneity, but that's not Germany. Vienna was also
the home of my favorite economist, Leopold Kohr, the
author of Kohr principles (e.g., Size is the root of all evil).
I always have a wonderful time in Vienna but then who
doesn't like Mitteleuropa?
When I speak of Europe, I always have in mind the years
prior to 2015. A friend of mine told me that the best present
he could offer his wife would be a month spent together
in Paris. She has no interest in Berlin but then she's Dutch,
and the Dutch suffered significantly during the last German
occupation.
At least in the U.S., the interest in the study of German is
slowly dying. Our college students are now much more interested
in Chinese and Japanese. However, French is still very
popular and continues to be taught at the high school level.
Girls love it! After WW II German lost its historic chance to be a world
language to English, and is not going to get that chance againReplies: @RadicalCenter, @Peter Akuleyev, @anon
Yeah, we get it. Germany is only about the holocaust narrative and you hate Germans. Stuff it.
A frank conversation about the Zeitgeist? Probably not--the inability to have such a conversation is an essential part of the Zeitgeist. The rot in western Europe, the U.S. and Canada goes so deep that probably only a cataclysm will change it.Replies: @Bill Jones, @Expletive Deleted
We hatesss it, myyyy precioussss
I blame his dad, thwarted ambition, unrequited love turns to hate and all that
“Fenerbahçe wanted him to transfer to the club but his father prevented it”.
Just think, we could have been watching him being turned inside out on a wet November night by Terry Neill’s boys instead. And he’d have been lovin’ every minute of it.
Of course, it’s true that all German lands, incl. Austria and
Prussia, had their origin in the vast Holy Roman Empire.
However, 1. After the Reformation, the Hapsburg lands
that have remained Catholic and the Protestant lands to the
north began to diverge from each other culturally, 2. As the
Hapsburgs expanded their territory, their lands became
so multiethnic that the imperial edicts had to be published
in 8 different languages. This is precisely what bothered
Hitler about Austria, and was one of the reasons why he
moved to Germany. I said Austria is a completely different
country because of those two factors: it has a Catholic heritage
and has been much more multiethnic than northern Germany.
Northern Germans never had to publish their edicts in 8
languages.
Of course, these days Germany is v. multiethnic so when I
refer to Germany I mean Germany before the influx of the
Turks and other minorities.
I assume you’re Russian and therefore Eastern Orthodox, so
perhaps you’re not aware of all the subtle cultural differences
between Catholicism and Lutheranism (even though the
theological differences may be minor). One of them is the
veneration of the Virgin Mary which makes Catholic lands
like Austria, Poland, and France more woman-friendly, e.g.,
efficiency is not the primary value, relationships are valued
as well. Of course, Bavaria is also Catholic but Germany to
me has a Protestant feel because it has been dominated by
Prussia for so long, and that’s how native Germans defend
Germany. They say western and southern Germany were
fine until their culture was hijacked by “evil militaristic
Prussia.” And that’s a valid point.
While we may not be typical, our children are learning German from a young age, and we plan to have them learn Spanish and Mandarin after that. Never even considered having them learn French.
We considered having them learn Japanese, and still wouldn't rule it out. But Japan seems likely to suffer a massive population decline, and a country typically simply can't maintain its same military and/or economic size and power when its population drops substantially and there is no end in sight to the drop. Same consideration made us reluctant to have them learn Russian.
On the other hand, the way things are going, what kind of Germany will our children encounter 15-20 years from now? If it is an increasingly African, Arab and Muslim country, that's not what we identify with, it's not what we want to support, and it's not what we want for our children and grandchildren. Hoping they wake up in time. Hoping we do too.Replies: @SPMoore8
I had my children study German because a knowledge of German is essential in vast areas of academic study throughout the 19th and well into the 20th Century. I was thinking mostly of such things as history, philosophy, social sciences (e.g., sociology, psychology.)
But I would also recommend a reading ability in French, which, fortunately, is not that hard to acquire.
Conversational German or Russian (or virtually any language) is not that hard to acquire. However, for study or research those languages will always be important (assuming one has any interest in the 19th and early 20th centuries), regardless of their populations.
culture doesn’t appeal to women. I’ve met many women who
were passionate about studying French or Italian but never German,
and women being half the population are kind of important."
That is because German is the ugliest sounding language out of all the European languages. The German language is about as sexy Honey Boo Boo's mother.
The German language is the Cantonese/Mandarin of Europe. That is how ugly it sounds.Replies: @anon, @SPMoore8
“The German language is the Cantonese/Mandarin of Europe. That is how ugly it sounds.” — Which is why at least half of the most popular operas and virtually all of the most popular art songs (lieder) are sung in German.
The OP is a quixotic Polish patriot, although the “quixotic” is probably superfluous. Since virtually all of the nice houses in present day Poland belonged to Germans, but were stolen from them, and since virtually all the opera houses and other municipal buildings in half of Poland were built by Germans, and since most of the historic architecture and artwork (e.g., the Dormition of the Virgin in Krakow) was created by Germans, it is necessary to run down the Germans at every opportunity. It’s no more complicated than that.
that Germany so completely failed to create a great civilization?
France and Britain, despite much smaller populations,
created great civilizations that spread their cultures and
their beautiful yet efficient languages around the globe.
Today hardly anybody is studying German at America's
colleges and universities, and yet French, despite the
ascendancy of Spanish, is continuing to hold its own.
There must be some deep flaw in the German character that
prevented Germany from creating a great civilization.
True, Germany is located some distance away from Paris
and London, the two great centers of European culture.
As a result, the Industrial Revolution was delayed in
Germany by 50 years. Berlin, ruled by dour and rigid Prussian
Lutherans, was a backwater for most of its history while
Catholic Vienna was full of life and a great center of culture
ever since it was saved on Sept.11, 1683 from the Ottoman Turks
by the Polish king Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars.
All this was brought home to me when several years ago I was on
the train to Frankfurt, and shared a compartment with a young
German fellow of about 28 who was, in fact, permanently moving
to China because, as he said, he saw no future for himself in Germany.
When I mentioned I was actually going to Paris, he reacted as if to say,
"So Germany isn't good enough for you?" except he was more polite
about it. How many women dream of visiting Berlin? And how many
dream of visiting Paris?
In June several years ago I was on the plane
from NYC to Paris. About 40% of the passengers
were young white women, and not just any women -
they looked well-bred, the sort of women you might run
into at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side. And
they all seemed in a state of hushed exhilaration, even
euphoria - in a few hours we'll be in Paris! This is
what Germany lacks - too much of its energy has gone
into military expansionism and the kind of science
and technology that are too easily weaponized, and
not into the finer things in life. Even today Germany
is one of the largest arms exporters in the world.
So much effort going into aggression that underneath the
thin veneer of civilization one cannot help but sense
remnants of barbarism that perhaps makes the Turks
in Germany feel right at homeReplies: @Diversity Heretic, @reiner Tor, @whorefinder, @Gargamel, @random observer, @SFG, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Difference Maker
Germany is a great nation. Europe emerged out of a medieval Teutonic Europe
But we shall not go over again what has been said. I will note that one of our patients, a pretty German emigree, hinted proudly about her home region’s exposure to French culture – I expressed ambivalence about the desirability of that state of affairs and she was shocked.
When the invasion accelerated in earnest she grew withdrawn, and I like to think it was not mere
physical illness
Like you say, it seems to be women caught up in a romantic air. The burden of history is much for many to bear. As you can imagine though, I admire Teutonic qualities – the engineering, musical ability, soldiering, athletics, low corruption at any rate
Hmm.. Upper East side. Perhaps I shall find a wife there
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
physical illnessLike you say, it seems to be women caught up in a romantic air. The burden of history is much for many to bear. As you can imagine though, I admire Teutonic qualities - the engineering, musical ability, soldiering, athletics, low corruption at any rateHmm.. Upper East side. Perhaps I shall find a wife thereReplies: @Anon 2
Germany is a populous nation – at 80 million
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it’s striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world’s oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world’s
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinating
for their first and fixed and central principle that romance
is more serious than realism. We say that romance is (...)
the permanent religion of mankind (...) Realism, we say,
is life seen as somebody sees it. Romance is life felt as
somebody feels it."
- G. K. Chesterton
All evidence (e.g., American-born students' gradual loss of
interest in science and engineering) indicates that feelings
are ascendant today
P.S.
INDO-EUROPEAN FAMILY OF LANGUAGES
Indo-European->Germanic->W. Germanic->Low German->Old English->Middle English->Modern English
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
“All who are adherents of romanticism (as I am) have it
for their first and fixed and central principle that romance
is more serious than realism. We say that romance is (…)
the permanent religion of mankind (…) Realism, we say,
is life seen as somebody sees it. Romance is life felt as
somebody feels it.”
– G. K. Chesterton
All evidence (e.g., American-born students’ gradual loss of
interest in science and engineering) indicates that feelings
are ascendant today
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
You know, there’s this thing called a map. For hundreds of years the British government employed talented people, like Samuel Pepys and Winston Churchill, to spend a lot of time staring at maps with the intention of keeping the navies of less favorably located countries bottled up.
In early 1914, Germany fundamentally changed geography by widening the Kiel Canal to accommodate dreadnoughts. But the British government looked askance upon Germany’s large navy, which proved to be almost but not quite large enough, and reduced it in size two years later at Jutland.
As a student of geography I understand the geographic
constraints that made Germany’s location a bit unfavorable
compared to Britain or France (or Holland). What worries
me is the number of poor judgment calls that plague German
history, Merkel’s blunder being the latest. Too much
German energy went into the conquest of Poland (until
it finally succeeded in 1772 when two Germans, Frederick
the Great and Catherine the Great of Russia, initiated the
First Partition of Poland, with Austria also getting a piece
of the action). But the conquest of Poland carried a tremendous
opportunity cost. If I had a been a German around 1492
(and who knows maybe I was in a previous life 🙂 ) and was
also blessed with omniscience, I’d have dropped the Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung, and would’ve instantly reoriented
Germany to look west and pour all energy into the conquest of
Holland (and even France) which would’ve given Germany
access to great ports.
The problem is that since Germany is so big, its poor
judgment affects all of Europe. Germany seems good at
the tactical level (investment in education, science and
technology, armaments) but poor at strategizing. It’s too
late now but Germany could’ve been friendlier to Poland
and reoriented its energy west. I think both countries
would have come out ahead. And I’m just as worried as
you are about Merkel’s poor judgment. I feel no animus
toward Germany except, as someone raised Catholic, I prefer
Austria and France. As is common in Poland, I have distant
relatives who are German (I’d say the Polish are about 20%
German, particularly in the west). Finally, I really appreciate
the great job you’re doing with your blog!
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
German seaports are hundreds of miles further away from the New World and therefore a much longer voyage. This also explains why Portugal colonized South America, and why France colonized Quebec, the land the shortest distance across the Atlantic from its ports. This also explains why China colonized Taiwan and vikings colonized Iceland.
French are a minority in Canada because what was New France was conquered and colonized by Great Britian. Also, New York used to be called New Netherland.
P.S. Continental powers have a strong army and a weak navy. Fascinating!
constraints that made Germany's location a bit unfavorable
compared to Britain or France (or Holland). What worries
me is the number of poor judgment calls that plague German
history, Merkel's blunder being the latest. Too much
German energy went into the conquest of Poland (until
it finally succeeded in 1772 when two Germans, Frederick
the Great and Catherine the Great of Russia, initiated the
First Partition of Poland, with Austria also getting a piece
of the action). But the conquest of Poland carried a tremendous
opportunity cost. If I had a been a German around 1492
(and who knows maybe I was in a previous life :) ) and was
also blessed with omniscience, I'd have dropped the Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung, and would've instantly reoriented
Germany to look west and pour all energy into the conquest of
Holland (and even France) which would've given Germany
access to great ports.
The problem is that since Germany is so big, its poor
judgment affects all of Europe. Germany seems good at
the tactical level (investment in education, science and
technology, armaments) but poor at strategizing. It's too
late now but Germany could've been friendlier to Poland
and reoriented its energy west. I think both countries
would have come out ahead. And I'm just as worried as
you are about Merkel's poor judgment. I feel no animus
toward Germany except, as someone raised Catholic, I prefer
Austria and France. As is common in Poland, I have distant
relatives who are German (I'd say the Polish are about 20%
German, particularly in the west). Finally, I really appreciate
the great job you're doing with your blog!Replies: @Steve Sailer
Who is this Germany right after 1492 that is supposed to conquer Holland and France for the ports?
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
Yes, romance language words like dios, rey, padre, madre, hombre, bueno, peso sound like poetry compared to the glutteral germanic language words like gott, König, Vater, Mutter, mann, gut, thaler. I would hate to think that large portions of the world would be forced to learn the strange and illogical spelling and grammital rules of a germanic language.
P.S.
INDO-EUROPEAN FAMILY OF LANGUAGES
Indo-European->Germanic->W. Germanic->Low German->Old English->Middle English->Modern English
The main problem with Germany is that its a geographical location on earth with arbitrary borders defined in modern times and not an ethnic or cultural or language entity. Why not instead talk of the successors of the Frankish Empire? Or speakers of germanic derived languages. Or people with R1b haplotype?
it has by far the largest population in Europe.
Moreover, it lies mostly in Western Europe. Hence,
like all of Western Europe, it has been protected from
invasions from the east (e.g., Tatars, Mongols, and Turks)
by the countries that form the defensive perimeter of
Europe: mainly Poland but also Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, Greece, and the Balkans. Russia was too far
east and so for centuries was victimized by the Tatars
and the Mongols but also by the Swedes who were a
holy terror in the 16-18th centuries.
In consequence, Germany formed under almost greenhouse
conditions, and so one could expect a lot of great accomplishments
coming out of Germany, and nobody is denying that.
Therefore, it's striking that today there no German-speaking
country outside of Germany (pace Switzerland) while relatively
weak and scientifically unaccomplished countries like Portugal
and Spain almost effortlessly imposed their beautiful romantic
languages and cultures on a whole continent. Today Spanish is
ascendant in the U.S. and French is holding its own in Canada.
So again the question is why. The simple answer is that Germany
(spectacularly) failed to build a large navy in the 16th and 17th
centuries. And again the question is why? One answer is that
it was obsessed with the conquest of Poland, and Drang nach
Osten and Ostsiedlung in general. But why did Germany show
so little interest in the exploration of the world's oceans? I find
this question historically fascinating. An 11th century observer
would predict that 1000 years later Germany would be the world's
hegemon just based on its huge population. And yet, compared
to Spain and Portugal, Germany failed in this challenge. Absolutely
fascinatingReplies: @Anon 2, @Steve Sailer, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Hippopotamusdrome
More like the Germanic martial ability made them able to repel the invasions, thus giving their neighbors who were conquered the honorific of a “defensive perimeter”. For an example, the muslims were easily able to conquer Spain, and they tried to continue into France, but were defeated in battle by the Germanic Franks. This gives the Spanish the honorific of being of a defensive perimeter. Had they been able to defeat the French and tried to continue into Germany and were defeated there, then France would be the .defensive perimeter.
In the east, the muslims slowly and steadily conquered the slavic balkans. When the advance reached the germanic territories, it was stopped in the famous Siege of Vienna. This stoppage of advance makes the balkans a defensive perimeter. If Germany had been conquered, and the advanced continued into France and was stopped at the “Siege of Paris”, then Germany would be the “defensive perimeter”.
You really should stop calling it Merkel’s Boner. She said, back in 2010:
“Whether German perpetrators beat up a subway train driver in Frankfurt or foreign perpetrators beat up an old man in the Munich subway makes not the slightest difference to me and I am convinced that the vast majority of people living here, be they from a German or an immigrant background, want to live here safely.”
It makes *no* difference whatsoever wherever your assailant hails from, nor who let them in: crime is crime.
That is not Merkel’s Boner it is a religious belief (or the first signs of madness). Her words then should have been a massive warning to all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvsMPOfblfg&feature=youtu.be
https://www.google.com.br/search?q=slovenia+migrants&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSjAEaiQELEKjU2AQaAggADAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIo9R3xFK4e9B39CqUezxemHq4Y7xT-PsE59Dn6PtUr0yvYOcA5qzmiORowq0JZY3CAx6Q6NQDJLz0jVNydAXcIF0PiGT0D6DFT3bQXpGBKmsjU-er0mis53XzmIAMMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgSjY1GYDA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj39fbrnZjMAhWMHZAKHeuOBuoQwg4IGigA&biw=688&bih=575&dpr=1.5#imgrc=YI4J2ljkkNygbM%3A
Not the leader of Germany? Which Germans for some reason have zero resposiblity for. Just like it was only Hilter and not Germans. Pff. Germans time and time again have been exposed as psychopaths. By the way, not Jewish. Just sick of German cuckoldry destroying my ancestral continents homeland.Replies: @anon, @Anonymous
Prove me where I´m wrong. Not just that I´m unhinged.
The Ottoman armies mostly consisted of Anatolian soldiers. Ottoman armies (except the garrisons and the much smaller Rumelian army) almost always spent the winter back in Anatolia and all Ottoman campaigns started in late spring (it took them a lot of time to cross the Bosporus).
The Ottomans fully conquered Serbia but couldn’t fully conquer Hungary not because Hungarians were better warriors or whatever bullshit, but because we were farther from Anatolia.
Had Germany (with its frequent civil wars and fragmented political map) been as close to Anatolia as the Balkan was, it would have been conquered, too.
The secret of the Ottomans’ success was fratricide: all sons of the sultan (and there were many) were killed except the one who ascended to the throne, which meant there was serious competition for the title, and so the sultan was always a reasonably competent person, probably until Suleiman the Magnificent, after whom the practice was discontinued.
Map of Ottoman Empire
Ottoman northwest border is just under Vienna.
Racial Map of Europe
Note ‘Germans’ group southeasternmost border where it meets Magyars is Vienna.
Combine the two maps and Ottoman northwestern border exactly abuts Germanic southeast border.
R1b map
R1b eastern border where it meets I2a is at Vienna.
Byzantium made extensive use of Germanic mercenaries in the Varangian Guard in their wars in Anotolia. During the Crusades, Byzantium recieved military assistance from Nortwest Europe to defend them against Muslim advance. The problem was more like Germany was too far away from Anotolia.