"Should the voters go rogue and install any such party at the state level, a prominent police union functionary openly hopes for insurrection and federal intervention."
I don't know how that is *anything* other than a precursor to civil insurrection. Everyone talks about the UK being a tinderbox, but this is bad. *Really* banana-republic-level bad. And do they not know their own history? Weimar Germany was a seething mess of competing police and paramilitary organizations tied to specific parties and all armed to the hilt. If anything it was the NAZI party that cleaned that up and introduced a level of uniformity to the uniforms.
Just how stupid are office-holders in Germany? Their voters? Every day my old impression of German intelligence and industry seeps away ever further.
Apparently, the German constitution allows civil insurrection in a case like that. In another comment eugyppius replied: 'Article 91 permits the federal government to intervene in state affairs in the case of "an imminent danger to the existence or free democratic basic order" – either by commanding state police directly or sending in the federal border police.'
Oh I'm sure that will end *really* well. Imagine being in Eastern Germany long enough to have seen statist authoritarianism make a comeback where you hoped it had been done away with forever. At that point the east may as well break back off again entirely.
'"…state riot police should work together with the Federal Police on the strength of article Article 91 of the German Basic Law to intervene against the government of this East German state…"'
'…a prominent police union functionary openly hopes for insurrection and federal intervention.'
So the Constitution mandates insurrection against the democratically elected government in order to protect the Constitution? I haven't finished drawing my chart yet, but this feels very circular.
Article 91 permits the federal government to intervene in state affairs in the case of "an imminent danger to the existence or free democratic basic order" – either by commanding state police directly or sending in the federal border police.
Absolutely fascinating what is happening in the old West Germany.
Remember it was East Germany that used to live in a totaliterian state.
Will the penny ever drop that the East Germans might actually know a totaliterian State when they see one?
But- no - East Germans are the new Nazi Hitler loving people who are siding with Nazi Russia. Lol.
I just love History inversion but it is so sad that so many swallow it. One only has to look at Covid Clown World to see the perfect divide between East and West Germany.
The difference is the wording: Does Article 91 "permit" the federal government to intervene in a case of imminent danger, or does it "mandate" such federal intervention?
Deployment of the BGS in Sachsen-Anhalt would be a pure through the looking glass moment. They would cross from west to east the border that they were formed to protect from westward incursions from the soviet empire.
"your loss of constitutional rights protects me, my loss of constitutional rights protects you. Now go get your experimental gene therapy to protect me."
If the broomsticks with which they are armed in a good day when sick notes don’t keep them home presumably German police can be reinforced by EuroGenFor.
I so appreciate that you're a rigorous chronicler and not an opinion writer.
And we should all be honest about politics. If you have a "side" it's because you dislike the policies or philosophies of the other side, and therefore you would never want them to win, right? Otherwise it's just a board game. But policies affect our real lives.
The concept of bipartisanship is a lie against human nature, isn't it? We've seen in the US from the postwar era that the guys who go into politics see it as a fun club where they can trade small favors to achieve their overall common goals--to run everything forever and get rich.
And because of this I don't mind in the least Trump and his family finding all sorts of new fun ways to get rich as long as the Trump era destroys both parties as they've been constituted, forever.
I am not aware the Trump family is profiting from office. Not like the Trump clan.
It is important to analyse what went wrong g with the parties and the political class. We know what went wrong with the institutions the left took them over from within as per the decades old plan.
But why did non or marginal socialists get so disfigured.
The consequences of a non-elite majority will not be as your police commentator suggested. When their bluff is called they will be grovelling g cords ours of the sort the old elites gave.
They're making tons of money from all sorts of jolly schemes and I don't give the least damn about it.
Socialism is a religion like any other and its adherents are as little tethered to reality as any cult members are. People find it desperately hard to give up the foolish aspects of the beliefs of their parents/ancestors and they try to fill the hollow place with what they imagine to be a modern rational way of dealing with the world. It never turns out to be modern and rational.
'They're making tons of money from all sorts of jolly schemes and I don't give the least damn about it.'
I find myself feeling the same way, especially when I point out to my progressive friends complaining about Trump enriching himself that Biden, and before him Obama and the Clintons, did exactly the same thing—as has almost every other high-level politician in modern history, if not all history.
My progressive friends express horrified disbelief, at least about the Democrats on the list. Secondarily, they consider it a defense of Trump, which it absolutely isn't.
(I know some would call this what-aboutism. Like the label "conspiracy theorist", that's just dismissing by smear something uncomfortable to contemplate.)
The problem is that the Trump administration is actively promoting AI, which will, indeed, eventually neuter (but probably not destroy) the political parties, but will also eliminate privacy and freedom in the process. And they and their buddies are finding ways to get rich also, while the national debt continues its rapid climb. It will not end well.
It is an interesting theory (the “shared party state”). I wonder if it can really stand up with rigour against the more common-sense explanation that this is multi party democracy in action, with what in other countries is called “the establishment”. I suppose a forensic question would be, has any other party ever been treated the same as the AfD (there was a party banned as being continuation NSDAP I believe?) or conversely if any insurgent party has been treated differently than the AfD? You mention the Greens. I think a stronger explanation would be needed of how the Greens became an exception, beyond “because Reunification”?
The Greens were excluded and demonised for years, through the early 1990s - at which point they were allowed into the fold after purging their own ranks of anti-Atlanticist elements. This really was related to a general party-political shakeup after 1990, and probably a belief on the part of the SPD that the Greens were not a serious threat.
The other major post-reunification party to enter BRD politics was the ex-SED (later Die Linke), which got the full defensive democracy treatment from the constitutional protectors and everything for years.
Then there are of course a multitude of small parties that got the rough treatment after they started to win regional elections, like NPD.
Of course there are also the two parties banned under Adenauer to mention - the post-Nazi SRP and the KPD. These also important for understanding the political system, although the bans themselves didn’t matter that much as both parties were already in decline.
It’s not ordinary party politics when state organs actively intervene in the political landscape via intelligence agencies, judicial interventions and the like on behalf of ruling parties.
Of course I’m totally in agreement about the police letter. That’s extraordinary. Thank you for explaining the background on the Greens and the SED/Linke. It certainly supports your thesis. Very interesting!
>>It is an interesting theory (the “shared party state”). I wonder if it can really stand up with rigour against the more common-sense explanation that this is multi party democracy in action, with what in other countries is called “the establishment”.<<
Yes, it sounds a lot like what some people in the USA call "the uniparty."
Voting every 2, 3, 4, or 5 years for some asshole to make decisions on one's behalf is the pinnacle of human achievement. The Greeks got it wrong with their notion that democracy is direct and participatory. To allow plebs to vote online on matters that affect them would be anarchism. The American system is best. The US has twice the number of people that China has who have an IQ in the "mentally retarded" range and only 1/10 the number of people with an IQ in the "superior" or "very superior" ranges. 2/3 of Americans have an IQ below Chinese mean IQ. Allowing their votes to dominate the outcome in terms of which assholes are elected to make decisions is the best of all possible worlds.
Mass immigration might eventually replace the people, at least in "white" nations. The purpose behind Artificial Intelligence is to eliminate voting itself, which is more effective in the long run. It may also eliminate most of the people.
In California the influx of illegal Mexican invaders got so bad that a referendum was placed on the ballot to halt all services to “ undocumented “ . Sure they would come ..but they get nothing ! ..the referendum ( Prop 187 ) passed with 60% and 40% of Mexicans that were legally here .
It was immediately challenged in court and eventually…nothing happened .
This was a pure democratic vote ..Direct Democracy..so scratch even that thought .
Have you noticed that that the republicans and democrats are constantly fighting ?
Yet when Trump went in to Iran and killed the leader and continues a war everyone was in complete agreement . Have you seen any demonstrations by the Democrats ??
It ‘s the Truman Show . Curtis Yarvin has for about ten years now has been arguing that democracy doesn’t work . We have an oligarchy which works …for the few .
He advocates a Monarchy..like Steve Jobs .. all corporations are Monarchy. A top down command structure .
A major difference between democracy and monarchy is in the rules of succession. Both rely on the orderly transfer of power, but it's decided by different sets of laws.
A few years ago, there was a referendum here in Utah to allow medical marijuana. It passed by what I recall was a healthy margin.
Entrenched leadership, including the Mormon church, was prepared for this. They summarily substituted their own law, which was substantially more restricted from what the voters had approved.
Guess what, there was some grumbling, but no armed uprising or even noticeable pushback.
Incredible..I watched in disbelief as the Mexicans kept coming . They are now the majority population . As late as 1970 California was 80% White European.
I went to UCLA 1965-1970 and UCSB 1972-74 . I don’t remember seeing any Hispanics . There must have been some . I just don’t remember. I won’t debate good v bad but the change was dramatic and as I said in 1994 the public was aware and acted ….and they got Bupkiss
What do you think about sortition/lottocracy (Losdemokratie) as an antidote to the party oligarchy? Bastian Barucker recently had Jochen Krattenmacher on his podcast, a leader of a new microparty that wants to either supplement or potentially replace elections by sortition. In their vision, the parliament would no longer be composed of professional politicians who spent their lives climbing party ranks. Instead, random citizens would represent us, much like in ancient Athens, just with gender equality and without the slavery. Thinking about it, I find the idea surprisingly compelling. Of course, it's utopian. It will probably never happen - although we could approach it in small steps. After all, there are already examples of citizen participation that we could build on. I'm also skeptical of the prospects of the Losdemokratie party - none of these microparties has ever really grown to relevance, and if it miraculously did, I highly doubt that a party that effectively wants to abolish itself would still follow up with that promise once it has enough people on payroll. Realistically, it cannot work. Still, I'm sympathetic to the idea and might vote for them in the next elections. I'm curious what you think about the concept.
According to the Iron Law of Oligarchy, no matter what steps are attempted to prevent elite entrenchment, they don't work.
Of course it's a theory and not a law, but I think taking human nature into account, especially if you're at all aware of Political Ponerology, it's pretty compelling.
In the nicest way I can put it, politics in today’s Germany seems so very “conflicted.” Another more accurate term might view it as “really f’ed-up.”
Best to breath in slowly, breath out slowly, repeat and relax. Just go ahead and turn the AfD loose. Is there any real chance the AfD can perform any worse than the idiot clowns supposedly running the show currently ??
"Should the voters go rogue and install any such party at the state level, a prominent police union functionary openly hopes for insurrection and federal intervention."
I don't know how that is *anything* other than a precursor to civil insurrection. Everyone talks about the UK being a tinderbox, but this is bad. *Really* banana-republic-level bad. And do they not know their own history? Weimar Germany was a seething mess of competing police and paramilitary organizations tied to specific parties and all armed to the hilt. If anything it was the NAZI party that cleaned that up and introduced a level of uniformity to the uniforms.
Just how stupid are office-holders in Germany? Their voters? Every day my old impression of German intelligence and industry seeps away ever further.
Apparently, the German constitution allows civil insurrection in a case like that. In another comment eugyppius replied: 'Article 91 permits the federal government to intervene in state affairs in the case of "an imminent danger to the existence or free democratic basic order" – either by commanding state police directly or sending in the federal border police.'
Oh I'm sure that will end *really* well. Imagine being in Eastern Germany long enough to have seen statist authoritarianism make a comeback where you hoped it had been done away with forever. At that point the east may as well break back off again entirely.
My first thought is, *who* gets to decide there's an imminent danger, and on what basis?
Such squishy language is ripe for exploitation.
'"…state riot police should work together with the Federal Police on the strength of article Article 91 of the German Basic Law to intervene against the government of this East German state…"'
'…a prominent police union functionary openly hopes for insurrection and federal intervention.'
So the Constitution mandates insurrection against the democratically elected government in order to protect the Constitution? I haven't finished drawing my chart yet, but this feels very circular.
[edited to fix a stupid copy/paste blunder]
Article 91 permits the federal government to intervene in state affairs in the case of "an imminent danger to the existence or free democratic basic order" – either by commanding state police directly or sending in the federal border police.
AKA anything they don't like.
Absolutely fascinating what is happening in the old West Germany.
Remember it was East Germany that used to live in a totaliterian state.
Will the penny ever drop that the East Germans might actually know a totaliterian State when they see one?
But- no - East Germans are the new Nazi Hitler loving people who are siding with Nazi Russia. Lol.
I just love History inversion but it is so sad that so many swallow it. One only has to look at Covid Clown World to see the perfect divide between East and West Germany.
The difference is the wording: Does Article 91 "permit" the federal government to intervene in a case of imminent danger, or does it "mandate" such federal intervention?
Another interesting question is: *who* decides about the imminent danger, and how?
The same people who were in charge of the COVID response . . . whoever they were.
Deployment of the BGS in Sachsen-Anhalt would be a pure through the looking glass moment. They would cross from west to east the border that they were formed to protect from westward incursions from the soviet empire.
Come to think of it, this has parallels to Abraham Lincoln and the Confederacy.
Does it also parallel the recent suspension of civil rights in order to cure a respiratory virus?
"your loss of constitutional rights protects me, my loss of constitutional rights protects you. Now go get your experimental gene therapy to protect me."
;)
Article 91, that's some article......
If the broomsticks with which they are armed in a good day when sick notes don’t keep them home presumably German police can be reinforced by EuroGenFor.
I so appreciate that you're a rigorous chronicler and not an opinion writer.
And we should all be honest about politics. If you have a "side" it's because you dislike the policies or philosophies of the other side, and therefore you would never want them to win, right? Otherwise it's just a board game. But policies affect our real lives.
The concept of bipartisanship is a lie against human nature, isn't it? We've seen in the US from the postwar era that the guys who go into politics see it as a fun club where they can trade small favors to achieve their overall common goals--to run everything forever and get rich.
And because of this I don't mind in the least Trump and his family finding all sorts of new fun ways to get rich as long as the Trump era destroys both parties as they've been constituted, forever.
This is the comment du ma jour.
I am not aware the Trump family is profiting from office. Not like the Trump clan.
It is important to analyse what went wrong g with the parties and the political class. We know what went wrong with the institutions the left took them over from within as per the decades old plan.
But why did non or marginal socialists get so disfigured.
The consequences of a non-elite majority will not be as your police commentator suggested. When their bluff is called they will be grovelling g cords ours of the sort the old elites gave.
They're making tons of money from all sorts of jolly schemes and I don't give the least damn about it.
Socialism is a religion like any other and its adherents are as little tethered to reality as any cult members are. People find it desperately hard to give up the foolish aspects of the beliefs of their parents/ancestors and they try to fill the hollow place with what they imagine to be a modern rational way of dealing with the world. It never turns out to be modern and rational.
You're on a roll today 😜
I ain't always this sharp? I better take more vitamins.
Adderall.
'They're making tons of money from all sorts of jolly schemes and I don't give the least damn about it.'
I find myself feeling the same way, especially when I point out to my progressive friends complaining about Trump enriching himself that Biden, and before him Obama and the Clintons, did exactly the same thing—as has almost every other high-level politician in modern history, if not all history.
My progressive friends express horrified disbelief, at least about the Democrats on the list. Secondarily, they consider it a defense of Trump, which it absolutely isn't.
(I know some would call this what-aboutism. Like the label "conspiracy theorist", that's just dismissing by smear something uncomfortable to contemplate.)
It's really simple for me these days. I voted for Trump so the other guys would lose. They did.
Repeated login to the site is tedious.
I prefer evidence. What do you have to support your claim.
Do your own research.
The problem is that the Trump administration is actively promoting AI, which will, indeed, eventually neuter (but probably not destroy) the political parties, but will also eliminate privacy and freedom in the process. And they and their buddies are finding ways to get rich also, while the national debt continues its rapid climb. It will not end well.
Cynical me wants to reply that privacy and freedom were well on their way to destruction already; AI will simply accelerate the process.
how is that cynical and not just a description of the historical trend?
They're the same.
"If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it."
-Mark Twain
It is an interesting theory (the “shared party state”). I wonder if it can really stand up with rigour against the more common-sense explanation that this is multi party democracy in action, with what in other countries is called “the establishment”. I suppose a forensic question would be, has any other party ever been treated the same as the AfD (there was a party banned as being continuation NSDAP I believe?) or conversely if any insurgent party has been treated differently than the AfD? You mention the Greens. I think a stronger explanation would be needed of how the Greens became an exception, beyond “because Reunification”?
The Greens were excluded and demonised for years, through the early 1990s - at which point they were allowed into the fold after purging their own ranks of anti-Atlanticist elements. This really was related to a general party-political shakeup after 1990, and probably a belief on the part of the SPD that the Greens were not a serious threat.
The other major post-reunification party to enter BRD politics was the ex-SED (later Die Linke), which got the full defensive democracy treatment from the constitutional protectors and everything for years.
Then there are of course a multitude of small parties that got the rough treatment after they started to win regional elections, like NPD.
Of course there are also the two parties banned under Adenauer to mention - the post-Nazi SRP and the KPD. These also important for understanding the political system, although the bans themselves didn’t matter that much as both parties were already in decline.
It’s not ordinary party politics when state organs actively intervene in the political landscape via intelligence agencies, judicial interventions and the like on behalf of ruling parties.
Of course I’m totally in agreement about the police letter. That’s extraordinary. Thank you for explaining the background on the Greens and the SED/Linke. It certainly supports your thesis. Very interesting!
I think the Greens are useful. They advocate for policies the establishment want or can at least exploit. Rationing energy being the main one.
>>It is an interesting theory (the “shared party state”). I wonder if it can really stand up with rigour against the more common-sense explanation that this is multi party democracy in action, with what in other countries is called “the establishment”.<<
Yes, it sounds a lot like what some people in the USA call "the uniparty."
Once again, an excellent big picture overview of not only German government, but human affairs in general.
We need to violently suppress dissent to protect the democratic process!
Squash democracy to save it ?
"... embarked upon a sustained temper tantrum about the interference of alternative media and populist elements in court nominations."
OMG! God forbid we might have to hear from the people in "our democracy"!
The irony is rich enough to cut with a dull knife, yet they can't see it.
Should the AfD have the temerity to win in Sachsen-Anhalt, will you then become a Police state, in order to protect the Constitution, of course?
Voting every 2, 3, 4, or 5 years for some asshole to make decisions on one's behalf is the pinnacle of human achievement. The Greeks got it wrong with their notion that democracy is direct and participatory. To allow plebs to vote online on matters that affect them would be anarchism. The American system is best. The US has twice the number of people that China has who have an IQ in the "mentally retarded" range and only 1/10 the number of people with an IQ in the "superior" or "very superior" ranges. 2/3 of Americans have an IQ below Chinese mean IQ. Allowing their votes to dominate the outcome in terms of which assholes are elected to make decisions is the best of all possible worlds.
Yes. Democracy is fine. It is universal suffrage that hammers it. At the very least it needs to be net contributors only.
Making it officially an oligarchy, as the US Founders intended.
Many of us, especially in the US, will struggle mightily with our lifelong indoctrination about universal suffrage.
Same everywhere in the West. It has become a right just like everything else.
I think the Iron Law of Oligarchy makes population IQ rates moot.
As Brecht suggested in Die Lösung, why not just dissolve the people and elect another?
“ The people get the government they deserve …good and hard “ ..HL Mencken
They are feverishly working on it. We call it Artificial Intelligence.
Most call it mass immigration.
Mass immigration might eventually replace the people, at least in "white" nations. The purpose behind Artificial Intelligence is to eliminate voting itself, which is more effective in the long run. It may also eliminate most of the people.
Similar situation in the Netherlands where a minority centre-left government is holding the country to ransom. It won’t end well.
I learned in 1994 that voting doesn’t matter .
In California the influx of illegal Mexican invaders got so bad that a referendum was placed on the ballot to halt all services to “ undocumented “ . Sure they would come ..but they get nothing ! ..the referendum ( Prop 187 ) passed with 60% and 40% of Mexicans that were legally here .
It was immediately challenged in court and eventually…nothing happened .
This was a pure democratic vote ..Direct Democracy..so scratch even that thought .
Have you noticed that that the republicans and democrats are constantly fighting ?
Yet when Trump went in to Iran and killed the leader and continues a war everyone was in complete agreement . Have you seen any demonstrations by the Democrats ??
It ‘s the Truman Show . Curtis Yarvin has for about ten years now has been arguing that democracy doesn’t work . We have an oligarchy which works …for the few .
He advocates a Monarchy..like Steve Jobs .. all corporations are Monarchy. A top down command structure .
There is no “ fixing “ the current system .
A major difference between democracy and monarchy is in the rules of succession. Both rely on the orderly transfer of power, but it's decided by different sets of laws.
Functionally, one could rather say both rely on the appearance of an orderly transfer of power.
A few years ago, there was a referendum here in Utah to allow medical marijuana. It passed by what I recall was a healthy margin.
Entrenched leadership, including the Mormon church, was prepared for this. They summarily substituted their own law, which was substantially more restricted from what the voters had approved.
Guess what, there was some grumbling, but no armed uprising or even noticeable pushback.
Incredible..I watched in disbelief as the Mexicans kept coming . They are now the majority population . As late as 1970 California was 80% White European.
I went to UCLA 1965-1970 and UCSB 1972-74 . I don’t remember seeing any Hispanics . There must have been some . I just don’t remember. I won’t debate good v bad but the change was dramatic and as I said in 1994 the public was aware and acted ….and they got Bupkiss
Monarchies and autocracies are great, as long as your leader is a good one (it has happened).
Unfortunately, there are no guarantees, except that future contenders for the role will probably not be a good ones.
I agree . I don’t mind if they are A holes like Jobs . Everyone hated him . Just act in the country’s interest.
btw ..all those employees that hated Jobs are now multi millionaire
What do you think about sortition/lottocracy (Losdemokratie) as an antidote to the party oligarchy? Bastian Barucker recently had Jochen Krattenmacher on his podcast, a leader of a new microparty that wants to either supplement or potentially replace elections by sortition. In their vision, the parliament would no longer be composed of professional politicians who spent their lives climbing party ranks. Instead, random citizens would represent us, much like in ancient Athens, just with gender equality and without the slavery. Thinking about it, I find the idea surprisingly compelling. Of course, it's utopian. It will probably never happen - although we could approach it in small steps. After all, there are already examples of citizen participation that we could build on. I'm also skeptical of the prospects of the Losdemokratie party - none of these microparties has ever really grown to relevance, and if it miraculously did, I highly doubt that a party that effectively wants to abolish itself would still follow up with that promise once it has enough people on payroll. Realistically, it cannot work. Still, I'm sympathetic to the idea and might vote for them in the next elections. I'm curious what you think about the concept.
According to the Iron Law of Oligarchy, no matter what steps are attempted to prevent elite entrenchment, they don't work.
Of course it's a theory and not a law, but I think taking human nature into account, especially if you're at all aware of Political Ponerology, it's pretty compelling.
Dunbar's Number also works into this.
I learned two important political science concepts in order to understand your comment. Thank you.
:)
In the nicest way I can put it, politics in today’s Germany seems so very “conflicted.” Another more accurate term might view it as “really f’ed-up.”
Best to breath in slowly, breath out slowly, repeat and relax. Just go ahead and turn the AfD loose. Is there any real chance the AfD can perform any worse than the idiot clowns supposedly running the show currently ??
The idiot clowns beg to differ 🤡
Every day my desire to leave this banana republic grows stronger.