SPD sellout complete: Merkel becomes chancellor

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Spiffor
It's an excellent political move. The UK won't have the EU presidency for 12 years after that. It's basically the only chance for the UK to make a real difference in the construction of the EU for a decade.

Schröder has experience with third way liberalism. When he first came to power, he admired Blair. With the practice of power, however, he quickly changed his tune. If he expects that the same will happen to Merkel, he's perfectly right to do everything he can to avoid her taking the wrong European decisions while she's naive.

Besides, anything that can prevent the Rosbifs from destroying Europe is excellent. With his decision, he is serving his country and his continent one last time, and in a good way

You do have wet dreams about French importance in the EU, while marginalising Britain, don't you?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Yes, reform Germany's economy, by gutting the worker, who is also the consumer. Gut the consumer and you gut the economy.

Reforms and all those who support them are idiots.

I'm glad to see some things stayed the same while I was gone.

[BeBMan]

JohnT sighting

[Mazarin]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Son't worry, I know. However, his complete change of tune about Blair makes me think that there's more than just SPD opposition. If he only had to cater the demands of his party (which he didn't seem to care too much about during Hartz IV btw ), he would have not initiated too much of a rapprochement with Britain. But his outright hostility to British interests during EU negociations is FACT, not merely talk. He did ally himself with Chirac, and in a tight alliance at that. Party dynamics do not determine such diplomatic stances.

Schröder is an opportunist in foreign politics. He'd like to find himself in history books in one line with Brandt but he does not have the visions of the former. His alliance with France and Russia was a purely opportunist move after Iraq because he knew that he was going to get greater support from the political left for opposing the US and Britain.

Yup, but I hink there is more. Like many Social-democratic weaklings, he might have thought of his reforms as a necessary evil. And now that he isn't bound to do this "necessary evil", he can lash out at a system that he might actually despise.

You're perfectly right: once he doesn't have any responsibility for the country, he can fall back into old left-talk that is so popular. Critisising any reform as "unsocial" and bashing the US for everything is way easier when you don't need to tak care of over 5 million unemployed. We might see him joining the left party if he continues that game.

[q]
I'm not making this arse a hero of the masses. But maybe, now that he has found his freedom of speech again, he can prove that he's not a complete ass full of neoliberal ideology. [/QUOTE]
He's an ass full of populism. Defending the reforms that he thought were necessary will make for less applause with the unions and his own party, so he rediscovers his left roots as a poor proletarian child. "I know where I come from and therefore I know where I belong" was one of his most heavily applauded lines during his union speech...forget about the Cohiba-smoking Brioni model he presented himself as during his occupation of the "New Centre".

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by notyoueither
You do have wet dreams about French importance in the EU, while marginalising Britain, don't you?

The day the Rosbifs want to do anything else in the EU than destroy it, I'm all for them being in the centre of things.

Meanwhile, I prefer that the forefront countries are those that want to build something. Give me a Belgium, give me a Spain, give me an Italy. Don't give me a Britain.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Spiffor
The day the Rosbifs want to do anything else in the EU than destroy it, I'm all for them being in the centre of things.

You position that everyone who doesn't share you vision of EU wants to "destroy it" is not helpful for civilised debate, ne c'est pas?

[Theben]

and vice-versa...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Saras
You position that everyone who doesn't share you vision of EU wants to "destroy it" is not helpful for civilised debate, ne c'est pas?

My lack of civilizedness is reserved to the Rosbifs, for obvious reasons

I can accept that the new members have a different vision for the EU than many old ones. Because I expect that some feeling of genuine attachment for the EU will develop over the years in the new members, which will mean that the enw member's propositions for the EU, though different, will be aimed at the well-being of the Union.

The Rosbifs, OTOH, are pathologically unable to feel any attachment to something like the EU, except for a few exceptions. As far as the EU goes, 90% of the Rosbifs are destructive scum.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Spiffor

The day the Rosbifs want to do anything else in the EU than destroy it, I'm all for them being in the centre of things.

Meanwhile, I prefer that the forefront countries are those that want to build something. Give me a Belgium, give me a Spain, give me an Italy. Don't give me a Britain.

Insignificant provinces...

[C0ckney]

i think the new members will have little sympathy with the old franco-german vision of the EU. they are smart enough to know where their interests lie.

questions about the franco-german alliance itself are bound to be asked now that merkel has become chancellor. perhaps germany will move closer to the correct (british) vison of the EU

[OzzyKP]

A new British-German alliance can from and they can gang up on France.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by C0ckney
i think the new members will have little sympathy with the old franco-german vision of the EU. they are smart enough to know where their interests lie.

questions about the franco-german alliance itself are bound to be asked now that merkel has become chancellor. perhaps germany will move closer to the correct (british) vison of the EU

It is actually much more complex than that. The idea of a united Europe, that can be strong on its own, is not completely alien in the new members. Some New Members like the Czech are actually fairly close to the French-German-Belgian-Greek-whatever vision for Europe.

Even Poland, which is drastically liberal economically, and which is very protective of its sovereignity, isn't horrified at the prospect of a political Europe (it is actually Poland which tried to reconcile the French and British views during June's failed summit).

The Rosbifs suffer from a pathology that is very specific to them (and that can be found, albeit much more slightly, in Scandinavia): an obsessive loathe about letting anything escape their beloved sovereignity.
Considering that the European construction rests on the ideas of compromise and commitment, the Brits cannot hope to be a constructive force in it, at least not until there is a major change in the British collective mentalities.

I trust the new members to feel committed in the EU as time passes. The attachment to the EU rarely happens immediately. And I trust the new members to come up with ideas that will challenge French and German ones, but with the good of the union in mind.

I cannot trust Britain of such a thing. Britain's only vision for Europe is about what Europe can do for Britain, and nothing beyond that. This shortsightedness was very good during the times of the splendid isolation.
It leads nowhere in the time of the most ambitious peaceful diplomatic project ever undertaken by mankind.

[dannubis]

spiffor

[C0ckney]

I cannot trust Britain of such a thing. Britain's only vision for Europe is about what Europe can do for Britain, and nothing beyond that. This shortsightedness was very good during the times of the splendid isolation. It leads nowhere in the time of the most ambitious peaceful diplomatic project ever undertaken by mankind.

the same charge could be made about france, except that it would actually be true. britain's primary interest in the EU is free trade, which benefits everyone.

when you look at things that france supports, like a common EU foreign policy and tax harmonisation, a number of things become clear. an common EU foreign policy is an unworkable idea, largely motivated by a juvenile desire to 'stand up to america'. the french when they talk about an 'EU' foreign policy, what they mean is french foreign policy imposed on 25 countries, the clearest evidence of this was chirac's 'they missed a good opportunity to shut up' outburst, when several eastern european countries expressed support for the iraq war.

when it comes to tax harmonisation, this is a device for the big uncompetitive economies (read: france and germany) to stifle the more dynamic ones. you can bet your life that france doesn't want everyone to adopt estonia's 20% flat tax! i've heard you describe the impact of the new member's liberal economic and tax policies as a race to the bottom, france doesn't want to engage in this, because it is a race that it can't possibly win, and instead will try to get others to handicap themselves. i think that the new members see right through this.

you seem to think that there is something wrong those who don't wish to surrender, being french i suppose that comes naturally i think there's a lot more wrong with those who would give away their sovereignty so casually.

[Saras]

Baltics, home of the flat tax revolution!