Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: German Federal Elections 2013

  1. #1
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546

    German Federal Elections 2013

    With another four years gone by, 61.7 million Germans vote again on September 27th. This includes 5.8 million first- or second-generation immigrants. Result of the election will either be a CDU-CSU-FDP alliance or a grand coalition. Looks like about even chances either way right now.

    There are 34 parties on the ballot, some only in some states, about the usual amount. The 28 minor parties will probably score around 6-9 percent altogether, with between one third and half of that going to the Pirates. Neonazis remain splintered, but support seems to coalesce in the right-wing extremist corner towards the latest upstart, the "Alternative for Germany" party.

    Parties in the ballots, major, probably in parliament, by likely voting share:

    - Christian Democrat Union
    - Social-Democrat Party of Germany
    - Greens
    - Left Party
    - Christian Social Union
    - Free Democratic Party

    Minor (as in pretty much no chance of entering parliament):

    - Pirates (center-left, sorta)
    - Ecologic-Democrat Party (conservative version of Greens)
    - Free Voters Union (localist conservatives)

    - German Communist Party (should be obvious; Stalinists)
    - Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany (that too; Leninists)
    - Party of Social Justice (Trotzkists)

    - Right Party (neonazis)
    - Republicans (neonazis)
    - National Democrats (neonazis)
    - Federation for United Germany (neonazis, revanchist)
    - Pro Germany (neonazis)
    - Alternative for Germany (anti-Europeans, sort of neonazis)

    - Civil Rights Movement Solidarity (LaRouche cultists, sort of neonazis)
    - The Violets (esoteric cultists)
    - Party of Bible-conforming Christians (christian cultists, pentecostal-protestant type)

    - Referendum Party (single-issue party: direct democracy)
    - Family Party (single-issue party: families)
    - Women Party (single-issue party: feminists)
    - Bavaria Party (single-issue party: secessionists)
    - Party of Reason (economic single-issue party: libertarians)
    - Alliance for Innovation and Justice (single-issue party: Turkish-Germans)
    - Alliance 21 (single-issue party: Senior Citizens)
    - Senior Citizen Party (single-issue party: Senior Citizens)
    - Animal Protection Party (single-issue party: animals)

    - Mountain Party (joke party)
    - The Party (joke party)
    - Party of Nonvoters (joke party)
    - No! Idea Party (joke party)

    Another five parties who applied successfully have not filed candidate lists and will therefore not take part:

    - Christian Center Party (christian cultists, catholic type, national conservative)
    - German National Assembly (neonazis)
    - Communist Party of Germany (should be obvious)
    - New Center (national conservatives, possibly neonazis)
    - Party of Human Logic (single-issue party: parents)

    19 further parties' applications were denied for formal reasons (e.g. late applications, not enough signatures by supporters etc), another 10 parties were decided by the federal election group not to be formal parties. Complaints against this were ruled over by the German Supreme Court, in one case successfully for the party (the above "German National Assembly"). About 40 further extant parties or political groups did not apply to take part in the election.

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Feb 06
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    1,527
    "Hope and Change" ?


    I think just because someone is Anti-Europe they aren't neonazis.

    Ukip comes to mind they been tried to be painted with that brush same the Dutch.
    Anti immigration legislation is just as valid as tariffs on foreign produce especially if people want it to be done.

    AfD might do better because it offers an alternative to main stream. Populism is not always bad.
    http://www.darktube.org/watch/altern...s-in-elections
    Last edited by cyppok; 25 Aug 13, at 16:33.
    Originally from Sochi, Russia.

  3. #3
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546
    Uh, the AfD consists of well-known rightwing extremist (neonazi) figures among their local party leaderships, transports right-wing extremist (neonazi) political messages, uses rightwing-extremist (neonazi) figures of speech, and is openly anti-antifascist. Their local leaderships, in pretty much every local caucus, contains ex-NPD, ex-Republican, ex-Freiheit members, often with side stint in the rightwing-extremist corner of the CDU. A FDP study pretty much estimates their core positions to be close to the Tea Party - see also below.

    At best they're the newest flavour of national-conservative parties that have been a nonstarter in Germany for decades.

    At worst they're the personal pet political project of a single rightwing-extremist woman, who, in an analysis by a CDU-related institute has been collectively termed: antidemocratic, christian-conservative, libertarian, revanchist, nationalist, right-wing. Taken together those values... well, let's just say she would have had like-minded people in high positions after 1933.

  4. #4
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    2,589
    I think it would be a confusion drifting to downright wrong-ness to describe the Tea Party as neo-nazi. I fail to see how you can describe someone who holds libertarian views as neo-nazi or compare their ideals to those held power in Germany after 1933; the two are opposites. The idea of increased personal liberty for the individual limits the role and authority of the State, the two are almost inversely proportional. The more authority the State accrues the less individual liberty the citizen has and conversely the more liberty the individual has the less authority the State can wield. In effect describing someone as a 'libertarian neo-nazi' is a contradiction in my view.

    I note that one of the founders of Alternative for Germany is Bernd Lucke, an economist who in the past has advised the World Bank. Professor Lucke was at first a supporter of the single currency. I am not sure that he is being described as a 'neo-nazi' here but certainly he was never slurred in this way when he supported the single currency. Can it be that anyone who points out that by any account the euro has been a disastrous failure, even those who predicted it would result in the situation has caused when it was launched, are regarded "antidemocratic, christian-conservative, libertarian, revanchist, nationalist, right-wing"? The inconsistencies with this form of slur are abundant given that it has consistently been the pro European parties and institutions that have ignored votes on the EU Constitution, forced nations to vote again when they returned a 'no' vote, replaced Prime Ministers with 'technocrats' when proposed votes on bail out terms (in Greece) and cling to tenuous veneer of democracy in a European Parliament where only the non elected Executive can propose law. Those who use such accusations should look at their own democratic credentials... pot meet kettle.

  5. #5
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I fail to see how you can describe someone who holds libertarian views as neo-nazi or compare their ideals to those held power in Germany after 1933; the two are opposites.
    Libertarians want to leave the market to capitalism, which automatically results in economic oligarchy and takeover of politics by this oligarchy. See 1933-1945 Germany. At least that's the common opinion held on market politics in Germany since 1945 - that leaving capitalism unchecked is one of the root of nazism.

    We have a slightly different view of nazism in Germany than people abroad. It's not about the Holocaust, the war or any such historic events. It's about how a small movement could, within ten years, not only use current footfalls in a populistic way to demagogically bind 40% of the population to it and then successfully secure its position in power, but also how it could bind the economy to the government the way it did. Any party that combines this with nationalist conservatism gets the tag. Hence why e.g. LaRouche gets it too.

  6. #6
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    4,111
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Libertarians want to leave the market to capitalism, which automatically results in economic oligarchy and takeover of politics by this oligarchy. See 1933-1945 Germany. At least that's the common opinion held on market politics in Germany since 1945 - that leaving capitalism unchecked is one of the root of nazism.

    We have a slightly different view of nazism in Germany than people abroad. It's not about the Holocaust, the war or any such historic events. It's about how a small movement could, within ten years, not only use current footfalls in a populistic way to demagogically bind 40% of the population to it and then successfully secure its position in power, but also how it could bind the economy to the government the way it did. Any party that combines this with nationalist conservatism gets the tag. Hence why e.g. LaRouche gets it too.

    Considering you take family values to be a sign of Nazism German TV sacks presenter who praised Nazi values... | Stuff.co.nz ...

    I wonder about the free markets that by themselves became oligarchies.With no interference on the part of the state whatsoever.And Germany in 1933 an oligarchy?WTH?Did Krupp,Messerschmitt,Porsche etc... joined hands and ruled the country?
    It seems Germany never manages to gets free from indoctrination.Now it's the reverse.To the point when common sense is seen as ''nazism''.

    Btw,you have stalinists,leninists and trotzkysts.Nice collection,although the difference is practice is null and void.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  7. #7
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    2,589
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Libertarians want to leave the market to capitalism, which automatically results in economic oligarchy and takeover of politics by this oligarchy. See 1933-1945 Germany. At least that's the common opinion held on market politics in Germany since 1945 - that leaving capitalism unchecked is one of the root of nazism.

    We have a slightly different view of nazism in Germany than people abroad. It's not about the Holocaust, the war or any such historic events. It's about how a small movement could, within ten years, not only use current footfalls in a populistic way to demagogically bind 40% of the population to it and then successfully secure its position in power, but also how it could bind the economy to the government the way it did. Any party that combines this with nationalist conservatism gets the tag. Hence why e.g. LaRouche gets it too.
    So your argument is that is to protect us from Oligarchs who may support a Nazi control of the markets the markets must be controlled? I assume because Hitler was elected we must also abandon democracy? Perhaps it is the State activity and control of the markets that itself creates oligarchies - like bailing out bankrupt banks and nations with individuals money?

  8. #8
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Considering you take family values to be a sign of Nazism German TV sacks presenter who praised Nazi values... | Stuff.co.nz ...
    Eva Herman wasn't sacked for her screwy family values, but for essentially saying "it was better under Hitler". She made it even worse by using nazi vocabulary in her "defense". The public opinion in Germany at the time was "either she's a nazi, or she's an idiot". Bild actually ran an article with that header

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Did Krupp,Messerschmitt,Porsche etc... joined hands and ruled the country?
    Ever heard of IG Farben, as in the largest chemical company in the world? The Quandt Empire, as in BMW, and their personal connections with Göbbels? The cartels Siemens formed in the 20s and that it used in the 30s to become the largest electronics company in the world by 1939?

    The Nazis actually reorganized private industry cartels as part of the government (called NS-Lenkungsstellen), and made membership in them mandatory, introducing the Führerprinzip too. Started with all farmers in 1933.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I assume because Hitler was elected we must also abandon democracy?
    We have a line in our constitution about that actually.
    Last edited by kato; 26 Aug 13, at 20:09.
    TTL likes this.

  9. #9
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    4,111
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Eva Herman wasn't sacked for her screwy family values, but for essentially saying "it was better under Hitler". She made it even worse by using nazi vocabulary in her "defense".
    Thank you for proving my point.If family values were better represented under Hitler,then let it be.Granted, it may be a subjective thing.If highways were built under Hitler,admit it to be a good thing,etc...

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Ever heard of IG Farben, as in the largest chemical company in the world? The Quandt Empire, as in BMW, and their personal connections with Göbbels? The cartels Siemens formed in the 20s and that it used in the 30s to become the largest electronics company in the world by 1939?

    The Nazis actually reorganized private industry cartels as part of the government (called NS-Lenkungsstellen), and made membership in them mandatory, introducing the Führerprinzip too. Started with all farmers in 1933.
    I actually heard of all these.Yet you obviously mix things up.
    I ask again.Did all those companies BY THEMSELVES led to oligarchy and nazism?Not that Germany at the time was an oligarchy,by any reasonable definition of the term.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,292
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Uh, the AfD consists of well-known rightwing extremist (neonazi) figures among their local party leaderships, transports right-wing extremist (neonazi) political messages, uses rightwing-extremist (neonazi) figures of speech, and is openly anti-antifascist. Their local leaderships, in pretty much every local caucus, contains ex-NPD, ex-Republican, ex-Freiheit members, often with side stint in the rightwing-extremist corner of the CDU. A FDP study pretty much estimates their core positions to be close to the Tea Party - see also below.

    At best they're the newest flavour of national-conservative parties that have been a nonstarter in Germany for decades.

    At worst they're the personal pet political project of a single rightwing-extremist woman, who, in an analysis by a CDU-related institute has been collectively termed: antidemocratic, christian-conservative, libertarian, revanchist, nationalist, right-wing. Taken together those values... well, let's just say she would have had like-minded people in high positions after 1933.
    Kato,

    Having just slapped Snapper down for the absurd claim that the USA has a 'Fascist economy' and ignoring the boilerplate Snapper rant in the second paragraph, I must say I agree with the observations in the first. In fact, she beat me to it. I have little love for the Tea Party, but Nazis/neo-Nazis/quasi-Fascists they ain't. Libertarianism, small government & strict constitutionalism are pretty fundamental aspects of their ideology. All those things were antithetical to Nazism. So was Libertarianism - an ideology that very much places the individual above the collective and the state. While that may lead to perverse outcomes not in keeping with the ideals of libertarianism, it isn't the same as seeking those outcomes.

    It sounds like the AfD are a hodgepodge of people on a spectrum from standard conservatives to genuine nutters. They certainly don't sound like my sort of party and may have elements who are genuinely dangerous. Based on your description, however, they simply don't qualify as 'Neo-Nazis'.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  11. #11
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    2,589
    Bigfella I have long despaired of your logic - I now despair of your comprehension.

    Kato, as do I, believes that oligarchies are dangerous and can lead to Nazism; "Libertarians want to leave the market to capitalism, which automatically results in economic oligarchy and takeover of politics by this oligarchy. See 1933-1945 Germany." He believes that oligarchies are created in a free market. I disagree and believe, as I think Mihais argues, that oligarchies are created by Government intervention - a company acquires a Government contract or monopoly - and this gives rise to oligarchies. This is a restriction on, or Governmental interference in, the free market in my view which acts to increase the influence of the company/oligarchy in a manner that it could not otherwise achieve by selling in a free market. That company then becomes richer and can lobby the state to renew it's contract more than it's competitors - it can also say buy Government debt if it's a bank etc. My point of disagreement with Kato is how oligarchies arise; he argues that libertarian free market economics causes them - I argue that State intervention causes them. As the US Government and it's Central Bank empower a more and more oligarchic economy - paying Google to report on people etc - it follows that it moves further toward the Fascist/Communist (economically the difference is small) centrally controlled economy system. Though I understand you disagree with Kato and I that fascism has an economic model you agree with me that a small state libertarian ideal/model is less likely to lead to Nazi State.... I wonder if you see the contradiction here? In case you don't forgive me for pointing it out: If the smaller the State interference in the economy the less likely you end up with Nazis (which I 100% agree with you on and we disagree with Kato about) then surely the more the US Government and it's Central Bank - 'the US State' - interfere in the market the more likely you are end up with Nazis.

    I welcome you to the minarchist fold!

  12. #12
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,292
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Bigfella I have long despaired of your logic - I now despair of your comprehension.
    The list of things about your posts that leads me to despair is quite lengthy Snapper, but I won't bore you with too many of them now. One that appears consistent is the ability to read a great deal of stuff into something that has nothing to do with what was written but everything to do with what you want to see or want to say.

    Kato, as do I, believes that oligarchies are dangerous and can lead to Nazism; "Libertarians want to leave the market to capitalism, which automatically results in economic oligarchy and takeover of politics by this oligarchy. See 1933-1945 Germany." He believes that oligarchies are created in a free market. I disagree and believe, as I think Mihais argues, that oligarchies are created by Government intervention - a company acquires a Government contract or monopoly - and this gives rise to oligarchies. This is a restriction on, or Governmental interference in, the free market in my view which acts to increase the influence of the company/oligarchy in a manner that it could not otherwise achieve by selling in a free market. That company then becomes richer and can lobby the state to renew it's contract more than it's competitors - it can also say buy Government debt if it's a bank etc. My point of disagreement with Kato is how oligarchies arise; he argues that libertarian free market economics causes them - I argue that State intervention causes them. As the US Government and it's Central Bank empower a more and more oligarchic economy - paying Google to report on people etc - it follows that it moves further toward the Fascist/Communist (economically the difference is small) centrally controlled economy system. Though I understand you disagree with Kato and I that fascism has an economic model you agree with me that a small state libertarian ideal/model is less likely to lead to Nazi State.... I wonder if you see the contradiction here? In case you don't forgive me for pointing it out: If the smaller the State interference in the economy the less likely you end up with Nazis (which I 100% agree with you on and we disagree with Kato about) then surely the more the US Government and it's Central Bank - 'the US State' - interfere in the market the more likely you are end up with Nazis.
    As you bring up my 'comprehension' skills, by all means point out where you mention all of the above in this paragraph:

    I think it would be a confusion drifting to downright wrong-ness to describe the Tea Party as neo-nazi. I fail to see how you can describe someone who holds libertarian views as neo-nazi or compare their ideals to those held power in Germany after 1933; the two are opposites. The idea of increased personal liberty for the individual limits the role and authority of the State, the two are almost inversely proportional. The more authority the State accrues the less individual liberty the citizen has and conversely the more liberty the individual has the less authority the State can wield. In effect describing someone as a 'libertarian neo-nazi' is a contradiction in my view.
    The closest you get is one sentence in the middle, and that wasn't the bit I was focussed on. I simply agreed that it was wrong to label either the Tea Party or Libertarians as 'Nazis' or anything close. That is it. I wasn't getting into a tedious & esoteric discussion on the nature of oligarchies & how they arise. I was just commenting on the difference between two political movements.

    I have long since given up on your logic, comprehension skills or ability to understand the most basic historical facts. I suspect the 'stopped clock' principle is at work here.

    I welcome you to the minarchist fold!
    Congratulations on sticking to your 'I won't be talking to you any more' resolution for about 3 posts. Sort of makes politicians look credible.

    In any case, all of this is a distraction from a potentially interesting thread where Kato is uniquely placed to inform us. I'm curious to hear about events as they unfold.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  13. #13

    Join Date
    19 Nov 08
    Location
    Leipzig
    Posts
    21
    kato,

    I think the federal elections are on September 22nd, not 27th.

  14. #14
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546
    Shush, you successfully foiled my clever ploy to make everyone mail in their votes late.

    Which reminds me that i still gotta put my two Xs on my ballot...

    Anyway. Let's go back to campaigns. Oddly enough, when we look at current campaign posters, we have exactly three sets:
    - Vote for continuity (CDU, FDP)
    - Vote against the Euro (AfD, Republicans, PdV libertarians...)
    - Vote for minimum wage and/or real democracy and/or think of the children (everyone else)

    Here's a couple youtube clips for you, campaign ads - not much use if you don't speak German really.
    In this order CDU, SPD, FDP, Greens, Left:










  15. #15
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    2,546
    As expected shortly before the election the public opinion is going into a tight race once again:

    Latest survey from Infratest Dimap (leftleaning), yesterday
    CDU - 40%
    SPD - 28%
    Greens - 10%
    Left - 8%
    FDP - 5%
    Pirates - 2.5%
    AfD - 2.5%
    Others - 4.0% combined

    This would mean for coalitions:
    Black/Yellow - 49.45% of seats (minority; current Merkel government)
    Red(1)/Green - 41.76% of seats (minority)
    Red(1)/Red(2)/Green - 50.55% of seats (majority)
    Grand - 74.73% of seats (majority)

    (black = CDU/CSU, yellow = FDP, Red(1) = SPD, Red(2) = Left)

    Survey from Forsa (conservative), the day before
    CDU - 39%
    SPD - 25%
    Left - 10%
    Greens - 9%
    FDP - 6%
    Pirates - 3%
    AfD - 3%
    Others - 5% combined

    In this version, this would mean for coalitions:
    Black/Yellow - 50.56% of seats (majority; current Merkel government)
    Red(1)/Green - 38.20% of seats (minority)
    Red(1)/Red(2)/Green - 49.44% of seats (minority)
    Grand - 71.91% of seats (majority)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Merkel suffers historic defeat in German state elections
    By Tarek Morgen in forum International Politics
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: 26 Sep 13,, 14:10
  2. Iranian Presidential elections, 2013
    By 1980s in forum The Iranian Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13 Jun 13,, 22:00
  3. Pakistan National Elections 2013
    By Agnostic Muslim in forum International Politics
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 14 May 13,, 17:44
  4. CDU wins German elections
    By Ironduke in forum International Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28 Sep 09,, 23:05
  5. German elections 2005
    By SloMax in forum International Politics
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 19 Sep 05,, 00:41

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •