Germany: Hegemony in Europe

[pocketscience]

Personally I wish we didn't have the rounds system here - it's a nightmare for anyone on a budget, or who doesn't drink alcohol, and forces people to drink more than they want.

So you think it's a rather unsavory trait of the British?
I've never seen rounds as being such a dogmatic system. Anyone can/ should be able to opt out, especially those on a budget or not drinking alcohol.

Of course (as I'm sure you're aware), buying rounds simply isn't the custom in Germany, and the many Brits who think the failure to buy a round indicates stinginess aren't aware that the problem is their own cultural ignorance.

Doesn't excuse accepting all offered drinks in the round, then side dooring it at the end when it comes to your turn. Definite no-no.

Anyway... we digress.

 

[teuchter]

That was spelled out in the first post here.

You have not spelled out how educational initiatives from the 1850s relating to personal savings can be used in any meaningful way to support the argument that a "will to power" exists throughout the current German population.

 

[pocketscience]

You have not spelled out how educational initiatives from the 1850s relating to personal savings can be used in any meaningful way to support the argument that a "will to power" exists throughout the current German population.

Because you only asked for the relevance. I pointed that out. Now you're asking for something more.
Like there are no victorian values that have permeated through to contemporary UK society.
Anyway, anyone looking at it objectivly would see it, but as you're being decietful in your style of discussion again, shifting goalposts in your questions to make it look like the person you're engaging with was avoiding a certain point, I can't be arsed. Sorry

 

[teuchter]

Because you only asked for the relevance. I pointed that out. Now you're asking for something more.
Like there are no victorian values that have permeated through to contemporary UK society.
Anyway, anyone looking at it objectivly would see it, but as you're being decietful in your style of discussion again, shifting goalposts in your questions to make it look like the person you're engaging with was avoiding a certain point, I can't be arsed. Sorry

You have not spelled out the relevance either. Yes, things that happened in the past may affect how things are now. That's just a truism. You've not explained how this leads to the idea that therefore there exists this "will to power". provided those links, and some quotes, and stated:

it may go a small way to explaining the question that @bimble posed as to whether there is such a thing as "a will to power" in Germany. I really cant think of any other people who would consider their personal savings to be directly related to supporting the state.

I tried to set out the series of connections you appear to have made:

(1) the curators of an exhibition say that staying out of debt is important to most Germans
(2) you interpret the motivation behind this as a desire to support the state (not, say a desire to be financially secure in retirement)
(3) you interpret it that way because...what? Is it because of an epithet written on a savings box from the Nazi era, which is mentioned in a guardian article? Or based on some other more solid and contemporary evidence?
(4) having argued that this is the motivation for the habit of saving - the interests of the state - you then assume that that means an interest in the state expressing power over other countries. Rather than anything else, like, say, a strong economy that can provide secure employment and welfare.

You've not addressed these. If you can't be bothered, fine. I've not shifted any goalposts though.

 

[pocketscience]

You have not spelled out the relevance either.

Sorry, I thought you'd be able to join the 3 dots yourself. Or didn't you read the first post and it's contents?

One could draw a conclusion that if all Germans are savers, and that there's a remaining legacy to the ideology that their savings are thought to be "for the national good" they would then feel directly represented (as stakeholders if you like) by the conditions detailed in the Lapavitsas document BA linked to. That being, that if their savings are for the national good, it also equates to German capital being drawn along nationalistic lines.
It's possible that Schäuble knew at the time that he had the backing of the german savers (the will of his people) enabling him to play power politics with the greeks - i.e doing the dirty work on behalf of mostly german banks.

One could also suggest, in contrast, that capital in most other (particularly western) countries is mostly drawn across class lines i.e: the bulk of invested capital being held by the minority moneyed elites and there's generally a detachment between the large swathes of working class people (who mostly don't have a pot to piss in) and a banks' bad investment. Therefore It wouldn't have allowed say a UK government to have acted in such a way as Schäuble did with another foreign nation because the majority of the british public would see it for what it is, another stitch up for the will of the rich and not the will of the people (i.e the nation).

 

[teuchter]

Sorry, I thought you'd be able to join the 3 dots yourself. Or didn't you read the first post and it's contents?

One could draw a conclusion that if all Germans are savers, and that there's a remaining legacy to the ideology that their savings are thought to be "for the national good" they would then feel directly represented (as stakeholders if you like) by the conditions detailed in the Lapavitsas document BA linked to. That being, that if their savings are for the national good, it also equates to German capital being drawn along nationalistic lines.
It's possible that Schäuble knew at the time that he had the backing of the german savers (the will of his people) enabling him to play power politics with the greeks - i.e doing the dirty work on behalf of mostly german banks.

One could also suggest, in contrast, that capital in most other (particularly western) countries is mostly drawn across class lines i.e: the bulk of invested capital being held by the minority moneyed elites and there's generally a detachment between the large swathes of working class people (who mostly don't have a pot to piss in) and a banks' bad investment. Therefore It wouldn't have allowed say a UK government to have acted in such a way as Schäuble did with another foreign nation because the majority of the british public would see it for what it is, another stitch up for the will of the rich and not the will of the people (i.e the nation).

You tagged me into this thread with a reference to accusations of racism following on from your generalisations about Germans in another thread. So I have been looking at this in that light. And you start this thread with a reference to that other thread, where bimble had asked whether there's a "Teutonic will to power". Your answer to that was

I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but IMO a disproportionately high number compared with most other countries.
On a national level it does start to paint an ugly picture and these individual characteristics seem to lend themselves particularly well to politicians, who obviously end up being the ones shaping policies reflecting these characteristics on the nation both internally and abroad.
I think you'll find most germans from center left to the outer left wing fringes would openly agree with a lot of this - particularly on the outer fringes e.g: German Antifa won't have a good word to say about the nation as a whole and it's not uncommon to meet people making it their life mission to hinder what they believe is the inevitable reoccurrence of fascism in Germany.

On a topical note: why do you think it's Germany standing alone opposing closer federal unity, and particularly a federal fiscal policy in the EU? and realistically, do you really think there's a chance that the remaining 26 nations will be able to overturn the german 'will' on that policy?

German have full hegemony in the Eu right now. I doubt they'll be letting go of that too soon.

It was the first two paragraphs I took exception to. When asked about the "Teutonic will to power" you started talking about "unsavoury individual characteristics", not the cumulative effects of the way capital is distributed in Germany's economy on how the country interacts on an international level. Your rather tortuous explanation above, justifying how this stuff - and no, I've not read the 33 pages of the Lapavitsas document - can be used to say that they is a "will to power" might(?) make sense but only with a different understanding of what someone might mean by a "Teutonic will to power".

Maybe there's an argument to be made that the overall structure of Germany's economy and its place in Europe leads to something that looks like a "will to power". That's a totally different thing from there being some kind of prevailing character trait of individual Germans that leads them to pursue or push for a nationalistic dominance on the continent.

The distinction you make between Germany and the UK is not based on some kind of character trait found in the population. It's to do with how money is distributed. You almost seem to be saying that it's a good thing to have the bulk of invested capital held by moneyed elites. Does capital being held in such a way in countries like the UK result from our less-unsavoury individual characteristics?

 

[pocketscience]

The distinction you make between Germany and the UK is not based on some kind of character trait found in the population.

Er, you seemed to have missed the bit about obsessivly saving money.
The population of one of those nations has the trait. The other doesn't.

You almost seem to be saying that it's a good thing to have the bulk of invested capital held by moneyed elites.

And you seem to have made a wildly false interpretation of something i didnt write. I hope your not being decietful again.[/QUOTE]

Does capital being held in such a way in countries like the UK result from our less-unsavoury individual characteristics?

Maybe the british working class going down the pub and spunking their hard earned buying rounds is less unsavoury? Maybe all Germans being conservative and saving theirs are like our elites?
Maybe you're on to something!
Anyway, that hypothesis can be trashed but it is good to see you able to engage about it here without immeadiaitly resorting to cries of racism. Maybe by taking the discussion away from the brexit context has helped

 

[camouflage]

I remember this being a pretty interesting discussion that touches on the real reason the German economy does quite well... the usual national-stereotypes involving phrases like "will to power" etc can be set aside as usual.

The Finance Curse

tldw: a culture of investment banking vs finance banking, according to this professor wot comes from Germany anyway. Elsewhere in Europe (and the globe actually) there's also more of a savings culture. That whole Bildung muss kostenlos sein thing probably helps... all that on top of high infrastructure levels that demand high employment to maintain and contribute to high productivity... wonder if that has anything to do with anything too.

 

[A380]

But Germany isn’t really a country like England or France. It’s more like a bigger more complicated UK. Ask Bavarians what their identity is and they will normally say Baverian first then German ( or even Baverian, European then German). Similar is true for many Lander. And there are lots of ‘Germans’ outside Germany, Austria is just the start.

And if we are trading in national stereotypes: The Prussian Junkers are renowned for outstanding tactical brilliance, but strategic incompetence. I.e build just enough battle ships to piss the Victorians off but not enough to effectively challenge the Royal Navy, start two front wars or march on Moscow without winter uniforms.

 

[camouflage]

And if we are trading in national stereotypes: The Prussian Junkers are renowned for outstanding tactical brilliance, but strategic incompetence. I.e build just enough battle ships to piss the Victorians off but not enough to effectively challenge the Royal Navy, start two front wars or march on Moscow without winter uniforms.

Unit Cost Inflation Hell as far as the Dreadnaughts arms race went... happy to see the same pattern establish itself over the Americans and their Tank Mountain, F35 and PTSD-style Assault Policing, once you're in that position you really can't be trusted with all that money and power anyway.

The Germans didn't start WW1 did they, just got caught up in the machinery like everyone else is my understanding.

They were under time pressure come round two gegen the Sovjets though, but frankly it's a good thing they misplayed that one eh (considering the alternatives). Expensive though, specially for the Russians.

War doesn't work anymore, one thing the Germans seem to have finally worked out as far as Eurpean dominance is concerned. Trade, diplomacy, FDI and peace for the win.

 

[mather]

War doesn't work anymore,

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

[hot air baboon]

But Germany isn’t really a country like England or France. It’s more like a bigger more complicated UK.

well its a country that started out as a customs union : ( stop me if any of this sounds familiar )

The Zolleverein or German Customs Union' was a coalition of German states formed to manage tariffs and economic policies within their territories. Organized by the 1833 Zollverein treaties, the Zollverein formally started on 1 January 1834. However, its foundations had been in development from 1818 with the creation of a variety of custom unions among the German states. By 1866, the Zollverein included most of the German states. The foundation of the Zollverein was the first instance in history in which independent states had consummated a full economic union without the simultaneous creation of a political federation or union.

Prussia was the primary driver behind the creation of the customs union. Austria was excluded from the Zollverein because of its highly protected industry and also because Prince von Metternich was against the idea. By the founding of the North German Confederation in 1867, the Zollverein covered states of approximately 425,000 square kilometres, and had produced economic agreements with several non-German states, including Sweden-Norway.

After the founding of the German Empire in 1871, the Empire assumed the control of the customs union. However, not all states within the Empire were part of the Zollverein until 1888. Conversely, Luxembourg was independent and not a state in the German Reich, it remained in the Zollverein until 1919.

Zollverein - Wikipedia

 

[hot air baboon]

the usual national-stereotypes involving phrases like "will to power" etc can be set aside as usual.

if your country shares common borders with France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, Austria, Luxembourg, Switzerland & Czech-land then you might over the course of Europe's turbulent & eventful history develop a rather more active posture of interest & involvement in the affairs of those countries than say - Finland

 

[klang]

But Germany isn’t really a country like England or France. It’s more like a bigger more complicated UK. Ask Bavarians what their identity is and they will normally say Baverian first then German

ask a Scot and they are likely to say 'Scotland' rather than 'UK'

And there are lots of ‘Germans’ outside Germany, Austria is just the start

Most people in Austria are Austrians.

 

[Thimble Queen]

One of the reasons why German's would refer to region rather than nationality is, I understand, a rejection against nationalism and national identify following on from WW2.

Also regarding an earlier point, many Germans I know buy rounds

 

[camouflage]

if your country shares common borders with France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, Austria, Luxembourg, Switzerland & Czech-land then you might over the course of Europe's turbulent & eventful history develop a rather more active posture of interest & involvement in the affairs of those countries than say - Finland

No doubt, but it's not like you can tell a German by the way they march around in Pickelhaulbs all the time barking orders and pouring across borders, just because Freddy Nietzsche used the term "will to power" once. Or at least there's nothing particularly German culture about wanting power is there?

Besides they've only relatively recently stopped being a region of different principalities haven't they... if anything this EU lark is simply a return to form (supra-national associations, security and trade, ordnung muss sein etc).

 

[A380]

You couldn't be more wrong.

What is it good for?

 

[A380]

...

Most people in Austria are Austrians.

Yeah, but they just wear corks round their hats and throw boomerangs all day...

 

[Teaboy]

One of the reasons why German's would refer to region rather than nationality is, I understand, a rejection against nationalism and national identify following on from WW2.

One of my friends grew up in East Berlin during the GDR days. She has some fascinating stories to tel one of which is that they were brought up to believe that all the nasty Nazi stuff was those horrible West Germans and they were pure and clean and not at fault in any way.

 

[A380]

One of my friends grew up in East Berlin during the GDR days. She has some fascinating stories to tel one of which is that they were brought up to believe that all the nasty Nazi stuff was those horrible West Germans and they were pure and clean and not at fault in any way.

Ms 747 lived in East Berlin for a year in DDR times. A couple of times she had to challenge people who said ‘when West Germany started the war’.

 

[weltweit]

Post WWII, German industry has been, and continues to be, a phenomenon.

That British / French industry is not, is interesting by comparison.

 

[Teaboy]

Post WWII, German industry has been, and continues to be, a phenomenon.

That British / French industry is not, is interesting by comparison.

On the other hand some of their major construction projects have been an utter shambles which makes Wembley look like a triumph. For shits and giggles do some reading on the Berlin airport saga.

 

[camouflage]

You couldn't be more wrong.

Well, nice little earner for some obvs.

 

[weltweit]

On the other hand some of their major construction projects have been an utter shambles which makes Wembley look like a triumph. For shits and giggles do some reading on the Berlin airport saga.

Oh, ok, I don't know much about construction projects. I was slightly heartened some years back taking a train in a provincial town to note that it was late reminded me of home!

I notice more the small and middle sized manufacturing companies, usually started by a qualified engineer (often straight out of University) and which develop over the following 30-50 years into quite thriving enterprises usually employing hundreds, many on very good salaries.

 

[pocketscience]

One of the reasons why German's would refer to region rather than nationality is, I understand, a rejection against nationalism and national identify following on from WW2.

I would say that was the case up until a decade or so ago and then mostly only the southern Länder in particular Bavaria.
There was a noticable upsurge in national identity during and immeadiatly after the wotld cup in 2006 which was possibly partly to do with it coinciding with the first generation of unified Germans coming of age and also (quite rightly) partly for hosting such a great event. National identity at least in sport has certainly taken off in a big way since then.
Politically, the new breed of national identity movements like Pegida and most obviously the AfD have also done much better than the older versions like the Rupublicaner or NPD.

 

[pocketscience]

Piece in der Spiegel today saying that Merkel wants a german successor as head of the eu commission after Juncker's time's up in 9 months.

 

[pocketscience]

Yesterday the EU Ombudsman criticized the EU Commision on how it appointed the German (Bavarian) Christian democrat Martin Selmyr as Secretary-General of the European Commission.

MEPs are already raising questions about how a reform of appointment processes will be managed. “I would like to know how the commission intends to develop a new procedure, as the design of such a procedure will be in the hands of none other than Mr Selmayr himself,” said Sophie in ’t Veld, a Dutch liberal MEP.

Today, another German (Bavarian) Christian Democrat Manfred Weber has launched his bid to succeed Juncker as President of the European Commission. He has Merkel's full backing.

With a host of other EU posts to be filled in the coming year, notably that of European Central Bank President Mario Draghi, Merkel and other government leaders are engaged in a delicate game of strategy over which to seek for compatriots or political allies. Securing the Commission presidency may not be a priority for Berlin, not least as holding such a high-profile job could fuel perceptions the EU is a vehicle for German power.