elections in germany on sunday

[panta rhei]

on sunday, we'll go to the polls to elect a new/old government.
this year, it's stranger than ever.... the election campaign has turned into an almost american personality contest, and the outcome of the elections has never been so unclear and predictable at the same time.

there's a pretty apt article here:
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/interna ... 69,00.html


THE NEXT GERMAN GOVERNMENT
Who Wants to Play Politics with Angela Merkel?

By Michael Scott Moore in Berlin

With just three days to go before the election, 30 percent of all German voters are undecided. Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats no longer have a decisive lead, meaning anything can happen. But what will Germany's next government look like?

Now it's official. As the German election campaign hurtles toward its Sunday finish, polls are telling us exactly nothing.

Oh sure, it seems clear that Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU) will get the most votes. And we know that more political parties are poised to enter Germany's parliament, the Bundestag, than has been the case in decades. But the CDU, which in mid June appeared headed for an absolute majority, has fallen in the polls as their perennial foil, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's center-left Social Democrats (SPD), has risen. The big question now is, with a coalition government -- a partnership formed between two parties to achieve a majority in Germany's parliament -- clearly in the cards, how might power be shared?

Merkel's response to that question, delivered on Monday night during a televised debate of major political party leaders, is "There will be no grand coalition." She was referring to the prospect of her party teaming up with the SPD to form a government built with two parties that generally exist to antagonize the other.

What does her statement really mean? That a grand coalition is closer to becoming reality now than it has been in 40 years.

It's a prospect that nobody in Germany is terribly happy about. Imagine a White House made up of Democrats and Republicans, or a Tory-Labour cabinet in London. German pundits call it an "elephant wedding," a marriage of the two big parties, and the last time it happened was from 1966 to 1969. One can argue that it wasn't perhaps as cumbersome as power-sharing in Washington would be, but it resulted in one of the more forgettable chancelleries in post-war Germany. Even most Germans wouldn't necessarily recognize Chancellor Kurt Georg Kiesinger.

But as Germany's political pundits are quick to point out, a grand coalition isn't the only threat. Indeed, watching commentators speculate about new coalitions is like watching a dance of colorful shapes in Fantasia. And with 30 percent of Germany's voters still undecided, the polls aren't much help.


DDP
Germany is facing a -- ahem -- rainbow of possibilties this election season.
Merkel, of course, wants a black (CDU) and yellow (which stands for the neo-liberal Free Democratic Party) coalition. That is, after all, what her CDU predecessor Helmut Kohl had to work with during his 16-year stint at the top. But with the FDP polling anemically of late and her own party at just over 40 percent, the two together no longer appear to be able to muster the needed 50 percent to form a coalition.

Color coding German style

How about "red-red-green"? That would involve Schröder's (reddish) SPD sharing power with their current partners, the Greens, and a hastily-assembled, deep-red party called the Left Party, made up of SPD malcontents and former eastern Communists. But Schröder has ruled out the possibility of working with the "other" reds and his Left Party arch-enemy. And former SPD leader -- Oskar Lafontaine has likewise said he would not form a coalition with his former party. Despite the rhetoric, however, the SPD and the post-communist Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) -- which makes up a large chunk of the Left Party -- currently run the city-state of Berlin.

The most colorful idea is a so-called stoplight coalition, composed of the red SPD, the yellow FDP, and Joschka Fischer's Greens. With the CDU set to receive the most votes on Sunday, the formation of this coalition would -- as with the red-red-green coalition -- presuppose the SPD torpedoing a grand coalition. It is also one of the few possibilities that would keep Schröder in the chancellery. But even if stoplight coalitions have been welded together to run state governments in the past -- in both Bremen and Brandenburg in the early 1990s -- such a constellation would be difficult this time around. Green alpha-male Joschka Fischer and FDP head Guido Westerwelle are not exactly on friendly terms. Any coalition involving the two parties would likely be dependent on personnel changes at the top.

There is, of course, still a possibility that Angela and Guido muster enough support for the black-yellow dream team. And there's the possibility, as reported Thursday in the Leipziger Volkszeitung, that the CDU is considering -- should they not win the wished-for majority -- allowing coalition negotiations to fail, thus forcing yet another new election.

In other words, as mentioned, the pundits are busy.

If it sounds a bit chaotic, that's because it is. While Germany's parliamentary system is similar to those in Italy or Israel, it has -- since the war at least -- been remarkably stable. In large part, though, that stability has resulted from having relatively few parties as well as strict constitutional rules that set the bar high for dissolving parliament. The two major parties -- the center-left SPD and the center-right CDU -- have wielded power since 1949, with the FDP forming a coalition with first one and then the other of them. The Greens crashed the party in 1998 by entering the government with the SPD making it a four party system.

Too many parties for stability?

But now? "This year we have five parties" ready to enter parliament, says Uwe Wesel, a professor emeritus of German legal history at Berlin's Free University. "That's quite a few." Any one of them might share power because no elephant looks strong enough to govern alone.

That, though, isn't such a bad thing, say others. "Many people think our system would be a lot more stable if it were a two-party system, as in England," says Karlheinz Niclauss, author of "The Road to Basic Law: Establishing Democracy in Germany 1945-49." Niclauss points out that the Weimar parliament -- which governed Germany from 1919 until Hitler took over in 1933 -- was crippled by a pandemonium of small, uncompromising, basically undemocratic parties, like the Communists and the Nazis. "But at the moment all our parties stem from within the system, they believe in the constitution, and they're ready to compromise," he says. "So the government is fairly stable."


DPA
Chancellor Schröder has governed for seven years with the Greens. His reign is likely coming to an end.
And stability -- most Germans are convinced -- is better than chaos, even if nothing gets done. The sluggish grand-coalition years under George Kiesinger were also a period of fiery social change. Revolutionaries -- like the current Green Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer -- were fighting riot cops in the streets in 1968, while the neo-Nazi NPD leaped the five-percent hurdle to win a small corner of seats in the Bundestag. Germany was in upheaval, and what looked like constipation on a federal level amounted to a sort of governmental pause while the people changed their minds. "Until the grand coalition in the '60s," said Wesel, "we had 17 or 18 years of CDU leadership. After that it was 14 years of SPD."

The same thing may be happening now. This weekend Angela Merkel might well make history by becoming the first woman in charge of the Federal Republic. But she may also have to govern with a coalition of political strangers, while dissatisfied Germans work out what to do with their elephantine welfare state.

[stilltrucking]

Not much in the news about it over here, but I been following it on the BBC. I wish we had a parlimentary system here. Or at least a viable third party. The United States is up for sale. It is amazing to me how little it costs to buy yourself a new law protecting your industry. We are in the midst of the most corrupt administration in our history.


I would even vote for Hilary I am so frustrated. From what I have heard about Merkel she is much like her, a smooth operator playing the game.

I hear the campaigning is still going on today which is unusual.

May the best woman win.

All these problem areas in the world today all seem to have their roots in the treaty of Versailles. Britian and France busy raping Germany appeasing the fool Wilson with grand words about the war to end all wars. I think the world would have been a better place if we had not been manipulated into the war by British intelligence. I wish we would have let the Kaiser kick their @$$. Just my conspiracy theory panta. please excuse my rant.

[microbe]

I wish we would have let the Kaiser kick their @$$

Thanks a bunch. Another war you won for us. Durrrr. And John Wayne was nowhere to be seen. Poor little America being manipulated into a war against its own will. Gotta feel sorry for the little darlin'.

[stilltrucking]

What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression. WW fourteen points

Woodrow Wilson that poor got dam fool sitting there at Versailles with those bloody handed europeans. You are all so noble now, so peace loving, Europe has not a had a major war in over sixty years, and we have have been going merrily along our path of aggression ever since. And the only wars Europe has had in the past sixty years have been a direct result of the treaty of versailles.
WWI It was the shove that turned us into a world power. I can not think of a single piece of terrirtory america acguired from that war, unlike the europeans that protected their precious colonies. Maybe american samoa, maby that island was taken from germany and given to us, can't remember

Oh yes Europena Imperialistic wars were certainly our business. Our news papers full of stories about barbaric Huns raping Nuns, then there were all those loans J P Morgan made to the British empire. And then there was the Lusitania the innocent passenger liner full of war munitions. You can deny it but British intelligence did a fine job of seducing America into a war that had nothing to do with us. A war about colonies and empire. History is a passion of mine. This is no conspiracy theory. Do your home work. Yes poor america fucked over by Europe. Wilson the preacher's son wanted nothing from Germany, Llyon George and Clemanceau wanted there pound of flesh. I am an anglophile for sure, but that does not mean I have to see the British Empire through rose colored glasses. Try Dos Passos USA trilogy if you don't wan't to read your history.

Man you disappoint me,

You god dam right "poor america" Europe ffucked us over good. You all got your colonies back, your blood money from germany, so what did america get except to secure the loans we made to you during the war. ]


edit

WAR FAMINE PESTILENCE GOOD GROWING WEATHER FOR THE HOUSE OF MORGAN USA John Dos Passos

Versailles

Wilson entered the war with such noble motives. Make the world safe for democracy the war to end all wars blah blah sounds familiar don’t it. He wanted to be magnanimous in victory , but British and France and inlay too did their best to take their spoils of war. The after math of world war one set the tone for the rest of the twentieth century. What ever you say about America it went into the war with so called moral purpose, At Versailles they gave a sop to his League of Nations and his fourteen points. Maybe if congress things ratified the league treaty might have been better. The Guns Of August also an excellent book. The war was a family affair between Queen Victoria’s grandchildren, The English King, The Kaiser, The Czar the war of cousins. Why did America enter that war? Do you think if Wilson had his way the Weimar Republic would have had a chance. It all had to happen the way it did, cause that was the way it was. But if Hitler had been accepted into that art school in Vienna or If Germany had won, a lot of my family would still be alive. You judge America as it is now. It was a different country at the beginning of the ww one

The Avalon Project at Yale Law School

President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points


8 January, 1918:
President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points
It will be our wish and purpose that the processes of peace, when they are begun, shall be absolutely open and that they shall involve and permit henceforth no secret understandings of any kind. The day of conquest and aggrandizement is gone by; so is also the day of secret covenants entered into in the interest of particular governments and likely at some unlooked-for moment to upset the peace of the world. It is this happy fact, now clear to the view of every public man whose thoughts do not still linger in an age that is dead and gone, which makes it possible for every nation whose purposes are consistent with justice and the peace of the world to avow nor or at any other time the objects it has in view.

We entered this war because violations of right had occurred which touched us to the quick and made the life of our own people impossible unless they were corrected and the world secure once for all against their recurrence. What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression. All the peoples of the world are in effect partners in this interest, and for our own part we see very clearly that unless justice be done to others it will not be done to us. The programme of the world's peace, therefore, is our programme; and that programme, the only possible programme, as we see it, is this:

I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.

II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.

III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.

IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.

V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.

VI. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.

VII. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.

VIII. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.

IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.

X. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.

XI. Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.

XII. The turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.

XIII. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

In regard to these essential rectifications of wrong and assertions of right we feel ourselves to be intimate partners of all the governments and peoples associated together against the Imperialists. We cannot be separated in interest or divided in purpose. We stand together until the end.

For such arrangements and covenants we are willing to fight and to continue to fight until they are achieved; but only because we wish the right to prevail and desire a just and stable peace such as can be secured only by removing the chief provocations to war, which this programme does remove. We have no jealousy of German greatness, and there is nothing in this programme that impairs it. We grudge her no achievement or distinction of learning or of pacific enterprise such as have made her record very bright and very enviable. We do not wish to injure her or to block in any way her legitimate influence or power. We do not wish to fight her either with arms or with hostile arrangements of trade if she is willing to associate herself with us and the other peace- loving nations of the world in covenants of justice and law and fair dealing. We wish her only to accept a place of equality among the peoples of the world, -- the new world in which we now live, -- instead of a place of mastery.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I suppose Iraq is payback for your dirty tricks, now we have suckered you into a war

What the hell is the use of playing what if. World War I and World War II were one war to me. Just an intermission to raise another generation of cannon fodder. After World War I we took an isolationist turn. Left Europe to its own devices. You all have much to be proud of in the 20th century.

[microbe]

After World War I we took an isolationist turn. Left Europe to its own devices. You all have much to be proud of in the 20th century.

Who is you? What is Europe?

People believing themselves to be the "master Race" and murdering millions while hell bent on world domination should be ignored! Careful - being isolationist and seeing those monsters as being none of "your" business might just not work. Maybe they'll come knocking at your door - perhaps a small island somewhere.

Too many Americans persist in having a romantic view of their role in the two world wars. You came to the rescue? Bullshit. In the second world war The world was faced with one of its gravest threats ever and America decided to do nothing except profiteer, with some of its highest ranking families complicit in Hitler's evil. The French did not stand by, they declared war on Germany and lost 800,000 dead as a result. That's three times America's tally from a population a quarter the size. Don't tell them how good America was and what they owe.

I am well aware of Britain's role as an Imperial force and the evils it perpetrated. My family is Irish and no-one has suffered at the hands of the British more than the Irish. The world moves on and refusing to put the past behind WHEN COUNTRIES HAVE LEARNED MUCH FROM THEIR ERRORS AND HAVE CHANGED is what will ensure progress is prevented.

Man you disappoint me

Ditto.

[stilltrucking]

you dodging
world war one
world war one
world war one'
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one'
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one
world war one'
world war one
world war one
world war one

only one so called world war
why you going on about world war two
my post about world war one
not world war two
which was an inevitable aftermath of WW2
how many french and british soldiers buried on american soil
how many dead american soldiers buried in europe

Have you ever read a book called The Evoloution of Culture by Leslie White professor at U Of Michigan Ann Arbor.
Compared Rome and Greece with US and great britian
there was no master race in world war one, it was purely ecconomic, germany finally unified as a nation state came on the world too late, You and those Noble frenchman had the world carved up into your precious colonies. All those secrete little deals between european nations, and then the arch duke is shot and talk about a domino theory

yes change the subject, very glib of you to change the subject to hitler, and a master race. yes you are one slick dude

Sorry panta did not mean to hijack your post, I can not tell you how much I admire the german people, if one of the most civilized and advanced states in europe can commit mass insanity what hope do we have over here

[mnaz]

It seems the treaty of Versailles, which ended WW1, was seriously flawed.... the conditions and tone of it were overly influenced by France's desire for lasting vengeance on Germany. Many historians agree that Germany's penalties and reparations were too high, and that the treaty was essentially "asking for trouble". I tend to agree with this assessment.

What a fucked up 20th Century. WW1 begat WW2 begat the Cold War begat a host of shadowy "preemptions" and arms buildup, passed off as prudent, profitable policy.... toxic used to fight toxic, and the growing array of toxic waste dumps, many of which could come back to bite us in the ass....

[stilltrucking]

That space between the wars, the Weimar Republic, what could have been. A peaceful pacifist democratic Germany. The communists and the Fascists wanted no such thingl.

." Niclauss points out that the Weimar parliament -- which governed Germany from 1919 until Hitler took over in 1933 -- was crippled by a pandemonium of small, uncompromising, basically undemocratic parties, like the Communists and the Nazis.

Captain E. N. Bennett, speech at a Union of Democratic Control (11th November, 1920)

The fundamental falsehood on which the Versailles Treaty is built is the theory that Germany was solely and entirely responsible for the war. No fair-minded student of the war and its causes can accept this contention; but the propaganda story of Germany's sole guilt has been preached so persistently from pulpit, Press and Parliament that the bulk of our people have come to regard it as an axiomatic truth which justifies the provisions of the most brutal and unjust Treaty in the world's history.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWversailles.htm



"Curious! I seem to hear a child weeping..." [CLICK]

The cartoon above was created (incredibly) in 1920. It was titled "Peace and future cannon fodder". There is a small child with a copy of the Treaty behind them. Above the child's head is a comment "1940 class". The leaders of the nations at Versailles are seen walking past, and there is a caption: "The Tiger: Curious! I seem to hear a child weeping!"
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/year9lin ... lles.shtml
I suppose I am giving Lloyd George a bad rap, I tried to read USA by Dos Passos again and just could not get into it. But when I first read it back in the sixties I could not put it down. I Read all tree novels straight through, reading day and night, 1919. the big money, and the 42 paralell. He come down hard on Lloyd George too. But George was not able to say no to the massive reparations because of public outcry for revenge. back home.

The blessings of that treaty we are dealing with today are Yugoslavia, Iraq. Artificial states created by those great war time leaders.

The bitterness and resentment of the German people could be used to by someone wishing to unite the German people. This is exactly what Adolf Hitler did. This is why many historians suggest that the harshness of treaty of Versailles helped cause the Second World War. This is why the Treaty of Versailles is so significant.
To find out more about the impact and significance of Versailles use these internet links:

Interpretation: Treaty of Versailles [BBC History]
Verdicts on the Treaty of Versailles [JohnDClare.net]
The Treaty of Versailles [HistoryLearningSite.co.uk]
Public Record Office - making Peace [LearningCurve]

Of all the money we gave to Britian, France Germany, of all the money that was loaned, only one country has ever paid us back. Finland. We may be an Imperialist aggressor state now, but it was not always that way, what ever way microbe wants to see us. On theinternational stage we were once innocents abroad.

[K&D]

Woodrow Wilson- good dyslexic. too bad noone listened to him.

just like me. dyslexics untie!

do you think i talk to much, sometimes i wonder. i mean still waters run deep right, i'm a fucking babling brook. whether there is an ear to listen or other wise. i must communicate!

[mousey1]

Your chattering

Bothers me not

for

I have no ears

to hear


Chat away

Babbling brook

The eyes have it anyway


I see you....

the river that flows through it.....

The shit here I mean


This may not be funny but that doesn't bother me either....for I must play!


I wonder if anyone will yell at us...

Chase us away!!!

[microbe]

You dodging

I am not British
I am not British
I am not British
I am not British
I am not British
I am not British
I am not British
I am not British

You dodging

Who is "you"
What is "Europe"

You mentioned WW2 in your post so I replied.

You want to stick to WW1 suit yourself. You mentioned WW2 in the first place.

You said "we" should have let the Kaiser "kick ass" - you reduced this to that level. Whoever "we" is.

Man you disappoint me,

You think I exist to please you or disappoint you. Who the fuck are you?

I suppose Iraq is payback for your dirty tricks, now we have suckered you into a war

"your" who is your? What are you on!!!? "We" ???[/quote]

[stilltrucking]

An all-star drama in the grandest of Hollywood traditions, Ship of Fools is now a glossy, Oscar®-nominated relic from a bygone era, when actors were valued more than special effects. "Prestige" is the keyword in describing this high-toned Stanley Kramer production, and the passage of time brings the pros and cons of Kramer's filmmaking into stark relief. In adapting Katherine Anne Porter's acclaimed novel set aboard a German liner sailing from Mexico to Germany, Kramer and screenwriter Abby Mann (who shifted the story from 1931 to 1933) attempted to display the oncoming horror of Nazi Germany in microcosm, as represented by the ship's colorful variety of passengers, including maritally combative artists (George Segal, Elizabeth Ashley); a has-been baseball star (Lee Marvin); a pair of illicit lovers (Oskar Werner, Simone Signoret); a despondent divorcée (Vivien Leigh, shockingly garish in her final film); and several others who play symbolic roles with varying degrees of obviousness. Porter's potent themes are somewhat deflated by Kramer's pompous, heavy-handed approach, but powerful acting remains. Having lost what relevance it had in 1965, Ship of Fools is still fascinating as a showcase for well-drawn characters (including an observant dwarf, played by the late, great Michael Dunn) whose inner lives and outward interactions reflect a turbulent world irrevocably headed for war. --Jeff Shannon Amazon.com

Good movie check it out.

Sorry I got you mixed up with perezoso who is british.

[microbe]

Sorry I got you mixed up with perezoso who is british.

Well that explains it! It was all a misunderstanding!

[stilltrucking]

ten four
we of european descent are all guilty of fucking this beautiful country up. I am suprised that there are not Native American terrorists attacking us for what we have done to their holy ground.

peace

[mousey1]

It's not called terrorism it's called Homeland Security and it's been proven an abysmal failure.

Bloody water under the bridge....time to let it run clean.