RoR: Forum

Perhaps this is a bit off subject, but I'll throw it in for discussion anyway. What can we learn from this article and how can it be a catalyst for political growth/change in our country? No, I'm not saying that we should all chuck the tragic histories of many socializations into the sea to join their evidently blind bandwagon...I do actually have a few brain cells that the AZ sun hasn't poached yet.

What catches my eye in the article is, once again, the fluidity of the party system in Germany and many other countries in the world. The republicrats and the democrins have owned our American political scene for quite some time now, causing the decay of nearly everything initially good about their founding principles. Yes, we have "third" parties here, but the sort of duopoly we already have is making their efforts pointless. I mean, how many of us, in the last election picked either the Grim-Reaper-of-Education or the Mr.Sequel-of-Clinton-Healthcare because we felt that our votes would only count that way?

If we had a single predominant party, we could work together to attack problems. If we had three or more, and none had more than a 2/5 of the popular support, we could bring in new groups with strong ideas with greater ease...but since we have two strong parties, most Americans are afraid to try and reform one--fearing that the other (worse) party will prevail.

I ask you all, what do all of these other countries have that we don't that allows them to keep their political parties from getting stale? How can we reclaim that here in America?
(Edited by Halina Brooke Reed
on 7/20, 11:31am)

Post 1

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 12:58pm

It seems like it's hard for some Europeans to get the socialism out of themselves. It's interesting; I know some U.S. corporate folks who were sent to European divisions for the purpose of improving process, bottom-line, and many of the managers they talked to there complained bitterly about how the employment systems were not encouraging in terms of motivation. Most-heard complaint: "My employees are lazy." They talk about how the various governments contribute to this by over-guaranteeing job security. They complain particularly about a low sense of urgency in key sales positions.

Post 2

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 2:35pm

Max,

Get out of there. Collectivism may be so ingrained in the German psyche that socialism is an inevitability.

Post 3

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 2:50pm

I will try to after I have taken my share of the education system (my parent's shouldn't waste money on this state for nothing ;) ) and gotten my degree.

Yes, Germany has a Big Business Problem, as I call it. The upper positions of the bigger companies in Germany are intertwined with politics and thus also support state-socialism (because they get their share from it). Of course, any new laws will therefore be pro-big-business and against middle-class companies (which are in fact the motor of the German Economy (being one of the biggest Suppliers of Machines in the world)).

However, I don't think that anybody can learn anything from the German democracy system, except that it doesn't work. I know that you, Halina, would favour a multiparty system, but think about it a second. Mostly, this system will be composed of MORE socialist parties, because state-intervention usually sponsors socialism. Also, the administration will be weak and full of inner fights, because for example the Green party doesn't want the same as the Social-Democrats all the time. The policy-making would be incoherent or non-consistent, which has partial led Germany to be one of the countries with the most confusing tax-system.
I think the German Parliament created single-handedly one of the biggest job-markets for Economist by making our law so confusing.

Yes, the plurality of opinions and solution-concepts is granted by a multi-party system. The effectiveness, on the other side, is going down in correlation.

Post 4

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 2:44pm

@Halina Brooke Reed

I wouldn't say that there is much dynamics in the German party system. In fact, if one disregards the Greens, there are still only those parties in parliament (and therefore: in governmental power) which where licensed by the Allies after WWII. That is: the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU), the Social Democrats (SPD), the Free Democrats (FDP) and the Communists (the new so-called "Linkspartei" which is made up of the former dictatorship party of the GDR, the SED, and some who left-wing social democrats). The only new party is the Greens.
You can see, our party system is much more rigid than one might think. Why? This is part of our special "democracy" which was introduced after WWII to ensure that the German people won't ever vote again for a new Hitler or something. What is so special about German democracy is that our political establishment systematically protects itself from the people. There are certain political instruments that are used quite successfully in order to prevent the establishing of new political parties (besides some lunatic fringe groups and other insignificant mini-parties) which could constitute a threat to the estblishments power. Josef Schuesslburner has analyzed this very well in his book "Demokratie-Sonderweg Bundesrepublik". An especially important role plays the Verfassungsschutz (Agency for Protecting the Constitution), which published a annual report on "extremist" parties, organizations and people and their activies in order to ruin their reputation (in fact, this is an act of indirect censorship) which is very successful combined with the threat of a Parteiverbot (i.e. the Courts have, if so demanded by the government or the parliament, the power of banning "extremist" parties). The threat is enough to eleminate any opposition worth mentioning.
And there are still some other political instruments. To sum it up, it is rather difficult to describe Germany as a democracy in the Western sense of the word. It is rather some transitional system inbetween Western democracy and the former Eastern so-called "democracy" (i.e. dictatorship).

Post 5

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 4:52pm

Well if you ask me, Germany needs a little revolution about now. Its been what, 60 years since Germany's fought a war? Thats almost an eternity in German years.

An important aspect you mentioned Sasha is the German government's rigidness. Germany absorbed East Germany in one gulp and what was the responce politically? Nothing much, the government barely changed. Hundreds of thousands of muslims come in the country, see one law change? Democracy or not, Germany has always been run from the top down but we all seen what happens when that fails. Germany is really at a crossroads, the tradational parties are not going to lose power but a significant % of the population is going to become even more dissatisfied. Hopefully when this happens Germany will come out for the better (and take down the EU with it) but who can tell? All I want is for the US to stay out of it.

Post 6

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 5:19pm

Clarence wrote, "All I want is for the US to stay out of it."

Amen to that, Clarence.

Post 7

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 10:00pm

Halina Brooke Reed,

It may be that reforming our party system or other aspects of political organization could be beneficial, that is, more efficient, less expensive, more protective of individual rights, etc. But this seems to me to be like arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The fundamental problem is the size of government. I would much rather be arguing about the inner workings of a government that takes 10% or less of our income than the 40% to 50% that we pay today. And since most of what the government does, it should not be doing anyway, I am not interested in increasing its efficiency.

All government suffers from the same defects. Whatever form it takes, its very existence is a distortion of the market and a magnet for every kind of con artistry. Lord Acton was on the right track when he declared that power corrupts. Closer to the mark, I think, would be that power attracts the corruptible. It's the nature of the beast. If the minimum requirement for justice and defense requires us to feed the beast, it would be preferable that it be a pit bull, vicious but small enough to be manageable, rather than the grizzly bear that threatens us now.

Post 8

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 2:35am

@Sascha:

Indeed, Schuesslburner has an interesting book out, and he also writes insightful article for Eigent�mlich Frei (just to mention it here ;) ).

There are also some other devices the German government uses to block a communication between the rulers and the people. For example, the German Administration does not have a law that allows or forces transperency the way the US has. While you may order any information or report(except for National Security topics) from your administration and they must open the files to concerned citizens, the German Administration has no such obligation.
Most of what happens in the ruling-caste stays within its walls, except some journalists bribe their way up.

@Hardy:

But we are already in Afghanistan forcing a War on Druglords with our special unit and we have been in Albania (amongst other countries). I think the German government has already enough wars at hand, perhaps even more than it can handle.
Oh, there has been political response to the absorbation of Eastern Germany, we subsided them to death (perhaps a late revenge?!) and right- and left-radical parties became stronger overall. I think that there has been a political response on both sides. First, it brought the "losers" of the merging to vote for radical socialist parties (may it be national socialism or communism) and forced those bright guys who saw that they would never have a majority against the "losers" to abstain from voting or even moving out of Germany.

One problem may be that Germany never actually developped a Democracy or a Constitution on its own that held. The first Constitutions of 1848 were finally destroyed by Bismarck and his cohorts of elitism. The second attempt on Democracy in 1919 was finally blown by Hitler due to several factors which are too wide-ranging to tell now. The third attempt was led and watched by the US and GB. This attempt has not failed yet, but it will in the future. The attempts in the 20th century were all due to foreign powers pressure and not due to the will of the people. I sometimes think that perhaps we still don't deserve liberty, because we never have fought for it with our own blood, like other countries have done. (USA, France, England)

Post 9

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 2:43am

Your country"s view of economics is based on Marxist viewing... how did you come to see its falseness, or do you?

Post 10

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 5:09am

Mainly because of my interest in US and Capitalism. When I was a kid, I also longed for a system that could do away unfairness and poverty. Of course, I encountered socialism first, but I saw that nobody would be willing to work, when they don't get a motivation (money) or some other benefit back.
Then why would a doctor waste five years of education, when he would get the same as a rice plantage worker?

I then started about to think that capitalism might be the best offer and so long...

However, most people here can't go that way easily, because most of the literature is not available in Germany or in German. So, if you don't know what you are looking for, you will never escaped the German socialism.
As I see it there are perhaps a hundred convinced Libertarians in Germany, while there is also a large group of thousands of people who generally lean towards Capitalism (although they never learned much about the system and its philosophy and thereby are easy to be caught by statists), they are ignorant to the principles of capitalism outside the state or just like social rules (CDU - economically liberal, but on cultural and social issues they are restrictive).

I just think that I am someone who is easily intruiged by social coldness and thus am exceptional. People call me a US-apologetic, which means that I am rather an US citizen than a German. However, I have long come to like this "insult", because it truly is that way.

Post 11

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 8:19am

Max,

Then why would a doctor waste five years of education, when he would get the same as a rice plantage worker?

As I understand socialism, the doctor would get paid more that the worker, but the worker would have a safety net that he couldn't fall under regardless of how poorly he did. Of course, that safety net was funded by the doctor's money and there are all the moral issues with that, etc.

Sarah

Post 12

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 9:35am

How, then, does this square with the marxist viewing of employer/employee relationships? I ask because have someone who accepts the marxist view of what constitutes economics, and wish to be able to explain what is false of that view - without waving a book in the face...

First of all there is no free free-market economy, as well as no socio-economics or like. there is only one economy, capitalist covers, the principal workers try to exploit, with in order to reach thereby an increase in value, the increase in value is not a number those to be pulled tight can, this according to Karl Marx, but Marx had a mistake in reasoning, he mentioned only principal ones and exploitation to the increase in
value, not however the money. money is in so far important, without money cannot be exploited with the help of the capital, thus the capitalists borrow themselves this money, thus places itself ask, where is reconciliation, reconciliation is to that extent, that the capitalists a debtor to find must owe around their erase, see also the cash notes, there is certificates of indebtedness. each cash note has a date, a place and a signature, thus the economy is one inquires and offer, that is called capitalist must always a debtor find around to adjust. everything else are artificially produced matters of minor importance
arranged by politics.

how would you answer the above?

Post 13

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 9:49am

Well said, Randy. When the opportunity presents itself, support the flat tax. If we can't prevent theft, we can, at least, make it transparent.

Post 14

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 9:56am

Max,

How well do you think Rand is translated into German. Have you read both Atlas Shrugged and Wer ist John Galt? Why the title change, I wonder?

Post 15

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 10:03am

Max -- how prevalent are the writings of the Austrian School economists in Germany? Most of the important and early texts from this school are in German, including many works of Ludwig von Mises. Von Mises's book Socialism effectively destroyed the arguments of Marx and his followers early in the 20th century. Are the principles of Austrian economics touched on at all in university economics courses? If not then they need more advocates (just as they do here in the U.S.).

I was in Berlin a few weeks ago, and when I spoke to the people there they were all aware that "something" was wrong and many of the discussions on the TV news were in fact talking about Germany's "draconian" labor laws as the major factor in Germany's economic woes and large unemployment rate. The conservative party and its leader Angela Merkel look right now like the clear winner in the elections this fall and she seems to be pushing for at least some economic reforms. Am I getting the wrong impression, or is it possible that after years of economic under performance the tide might be turning a little in favor of free economics? The way I see it, there is really no reason why Germany shouldn't be the absolute dominant economy in Europe and the second largest in the world. It is only a series of terrible self destructive policies that holds it back. The German people are some of the most economically capable people in the world and their large population allows for the creation of economies of scale. All the country needs to do is make a move toward free economics and away from socialism. And wow, what could Europe acheive as a whole if you guys would commit to truly free trade and the elimination of all of the silly tarrifs, subsidies and protectionist labor policies which are restricting the free flow of trade and labor between EU countries?

- Jason

(Edited by Jason Quintana on 7/21, 10:06am)

Post 16

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 10:08am

Robert asks: Wer ist John Galt? Why the title change, I wonder?

The word 'Shrugged' is not easily translated from German to English, nor would the closest varient of that word in German convey the same meaning that it does in English. An attempt at a literal translation would be a title that is confusing and loses the dramatic effect that the author was trying to achieve.

George

Post 17

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 12:54pm

Getting back to the article. I think former west Germany's problems stem from it's reunification with former east Germany. Thatcher warned against this and she was right. At the time though everyone thought she was being arrogant and would not listen to her. Germany was in euphoria.

The consequence was that last election - for the first time in former West Germany's history, the ruling party was voted back into power during an economic downturn. This was only possible because the votes in former east Germany mostly went to the PDS (former east German communist party) and the Green party. If only west German votes had counted, then Schroder would have lost to the conservatives, and there consequently would have been economic reform.

What should have happened after the fall of the Berlin Wall is that east Germany and west Germany should have stayed two separate countries, but with open borders and free trade. This would forced east Germany to reform itself economically or lose all it's industry and workforce to west Germany, and the west German economy would still be flourishing today.

Eventually, when east Germany would become wealthy enough and have an attitude shift towards free market economics (probably would take 25 years or so) then the two countries could re-unify.

(Edited by Marcus Bachler on 7/21, 12:56pm)

Post 18

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 3:27pm

@Max:
Yes, I know Schuesslburners eifrei articles and I really enjoy them. ^^

@Clarence Hardy
In fact, Germany is the one country with the greatest amount of troops involved in NATO operations. We are involved in about 15 NATO missions from the Balkan countries down to Sudan, the Indian Ocean and Afghanistan. In terms of military undertakings, the current German government is not very reluctant. Strange enough: none of the German "peace-mongers" complains about this; the public is very well uninformed and our media are quite faithful to the government so that you won't hear much about it. For example there wasn't much news coverage on the European Parliament rejecting the German claim to a seat in the UN Security Council. Still, there is some interesting website which regularly publishes news and comments on German foreign and military policy: http://www.german-foreign-policy.com
But be careful; the website delivers some interesting information, but it is written by nasty leftist bastards, so you should not believe every nonsense they write and comment on. They have quite a talent in seeing conspiracies where there are none (at least I think so).
What Germany really needs is a lot of Objectivism and Austrian Economics. Only a cultural revolution can still save Germany - and Europe - now.

@Robert Davison
A literal translation would have been "Atlas zuckt mit den Achseln" which sounds quite ridiculous. Another possibility would have been "Atlas wirft die Erde ab" (Atlas throws off the earth) which I think in fact was the title of an earlier translation. But "Wer ist John Galt?" (Who is John Galt?) is far better, I think. As far as I remember there has also been someone who suggested naming it "Der Streik" (The Strike) as its working title was, but the publisher said he didn't want to ask Peikoff if such a change would acquire his agreement.

@Jason Quintana
Austrianism is fairly unkown in Germany. In fact there is not a single university which hosts an Austrian. Germany's major Austrian thinkers, i.e. Hans-Herman Hoppe and Jorg Guido Hulsmann, had to leave the country in order to get a chair in Economics, the former went to Las Vegas, the latter to Angers in France. I think the only German economist who is a true Austrian is Roland Baader who lives in a small town named Waghausel (near Hockenheim/Karlsruhe/Heidelberg) in South Western Germany. He has done a lot to spread Austrianism in Germany again, quite successfully, I think.
German economists have always been very reluctant to adopt Austrian doctrines. When Carl Menger founded the Austrian School, German universities were dominated by the (quite socialist) German Historical School and its leader Gustav von Schmoller. Menger had his famous Methodenstreit with Schmoller.
In Vienna, there now exists the "Liberale Initiative" which is quite pro-Austrian and made possible a seminar on Austrian Economics at the University of Vienna. As far as I know, they are also planning some seminars on the topic at German universities. Some weeks ago I spoke with libertarian philosopher Hardy Bouillon, who teaches at the University of Treveris, and he told me that he was going to give a seminar on Austrianism next summer. I am really looking forward to that because I then will be (most probably) a student at the University of Treveris.
And as to the writings of major Austrian economists: It is quite difficult to buy them here in Germany, especially in German language. But there is a new online bookstore ( http://www.buchausgabe.de ) which sells the complete works of Carl Menger, some German language works by Ludwig von Mises and so on. I think that Austrianism is on the rise in Germany, although it is still too early to tell whether that'll be successfull.

(Edited by Sascha Settegast on 7/21, 5:52pm)

Post 19

Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 4:53pm