German Election

[Satinavian]

US election was last year. This year will be the German one. Can we get some discussion or some hype out of it ? I admit it is difficult to do as politics here are significantly more somber and lack entertaining value. But let us try. At least we all know Merkel will be replaced. But by whom ?


So, we don't really have preelections and parties tend to present their final candidate later, but so far, most promising candidates are

CDU/CSU (Merkels party, center conservative) :

- Armin Laschet (more center than most of the party. but a coal lover, defendet Merkel on immigration, some people say similar to Kohl)
- Friedrich Merz (extreme buissness friendly, nearly neoliberal here, socially more conservative than than most of the party, failed to replace Merkel three times already but has not yet given up)
- Markus Söder (head of the Bavarian branch of the party, thinks the Greens are main competition and thus promotes environmental friendly policies to thwart them, but not out of conviction, says, he doesn't want to try but gets pushed to do so)

SPD (Social democrats)

- Olaf Scholz (Vice chancellor under Merkel, centre wing of the party)
- Saskia Esken (critical of grand coalition, has promoted stronger digital consumer rights and stronger environmental measures, party head together with Walter-Borjans)
- Norbert Walter-Borjans (critical of grand coalition, more leftwing of the party, party head together with Eskens)

Greens

- Annalena Baerbock
- Robert Habeck
Again double party leadership. Their politics are pretty similar as they got Ledership as a team. Deposed the old guard and ditched a lot of old ideas. Significantly more science-friendly than the party is genrally known to be. That has lead to all the esoteric folk and those opposed to gene food etc. to see them as traiters to their ideals.


I'll skip AfD as that won't ever happen.


Do you have a favourite ? Or like to make a prediction ? Or think i have forgotten someone ?

 

[ObsidianJones]

This is something that is very important, which I'll very much admit ignorance to.

As a favor, can you point to some trusted sources that seems to have reported on Germany's real issues in the past? I would like to get informed.

 

[Agema]

There's going to be a hole at the centre of European politics without Mama Merkel.

Some might say that's a good thing.

 

[McElroy]

I want the party with cars. Or autos as we like to call them.

 

[Satinavian]

This is something that is very important, which I'll very much admit ignorance to.

As a favor, can you point to some trusted sources that seems to have reported on Germany's real issues in the past? I would like to get informed.

That is surprisingly difficult as most of the sources I personally use are not in English.

There are some that are explicitely aimed at foreigners or English-only speakers in Germany
Deutsche Welle
the local
Quality is very hit and miss and DW sometimes is a bit too positive about Germany. But even on a bad day they are only quite biased or of low quality, not actually full of falsehoods

Then we have
Euronews
which has unsurprisingly a strong pro-EU bias but otherwise provides proper quality articles. Unfortunately not that many.

Some of the German newspapers do provide English content as well :
Der Spiegel (slightly leftwing but overall ok)
Die Welt (slightly rightwing but overall ok)
taz (hard left, but still tends to remain truthful. Lik might not work due to authentification stuff, use google to find it )
FaZ (very pro buissness. Overall quality is not bad except for everything to do with digitalisation or copyright, then it is pure lobby speak)

The one really to avoid is the unfortunately quite famous Bild. That is a tabloid so bad that it is forbidden to call itself newspaper by court order (Though i think the British Sun is worse).

 

[Revnak]

Ok, who there supports the right of workers at the business factories to wear khaki shorts to meetings? Based on my knowledge of the German people this is a key issue which may determine the election.

 

[Agema]

That is surprisingly difficult as most of the sources I personally use are not in English.

There are some that are explicitely aimed at foreigners or English-only speakers in Germany

I usually find Deutsche Welle pretty handy for basic coverage of things German and - although I lack a lot of nuance about German politics - seemingly without too much of an agenda to push.

I'm somewhat familiar with Der Spiegel because I mostly read the Guardian, and I believe they are both part of a sort of centre-left newspaper mutual assistance group (I'm assuming mostly agreements to share resources particularly for international coverage, etc.) so effectively some DS articles and columnists end up in The Guardian.

 

[Satinavian]

So some update

the final candidates are :

- Armin Laschet
- Olaf Scholz
- Annalena Baerbock

 

[Hawki]

I admit it is difficult to do as politics here are significantly more somber and lack entertaining value.

Dude, have you looked at these forums? Political discussions here are many things, but hardly "somber."

 

[Satinavian]

With "here" i meant Germany as opposed to American or British politics.

And i kinda was right. Hardly anyone really cared in this forum. It somehow was more interesting to continue to discuss the last US election.

 

[Agema]

So some update

the final candidates are :

- Armin Laschet
- Olaf Scholz
- Annalena Baerbock

CDU will be the plurality I'm sure and therefore get a small boost in seats relative to their vote percentage, but I suspect they've lost so much support since last election that they'll have huge problems forming a coalition. Looking like Greens will come in second.

So I guess the endgame might be a CDU-Green coalition to creep over the line if the two can scrape enough seats. If they can't it gets really problematic because they'll need the FDP or SDP; the latter might be unviable because it will de facto be a left-wing government where the Greens and SDP outweigh the CDU. CDU-SDP-FDP could be tough to arrange - don't think the SDP and FDP are on great terms ideologically, and I can't help but feel that propping up the centre right has compounded the SDP's slide in the polls over the last decade or two and they may be reluctant.

Then after that I guess Greens may be able to try a left wing coalition with SDP and Linke (not sure whether FDP would agree to take part in a left coalition). I know Linke doesn't have that dodgy, objectionable, extremist vibe that AfD do, but it may still be considered rather unpalatable.

 

[SilentPony]

Oh God not again! Those Germans, they're always up to something.

 

[stroopwafel]

As a casual observer it seems you guys always end up with a center left CDU/CSU SPD coalition with particular European integration and pro-immigration policies dictated by Wolfgang Schauble(despite how many Germans disagree with that considering the popularity of AfD). Your options seem limited to most likely the same or at most highly similar coalition or a protest vote like AfD who get excluded from any coalition despite them being like the third biggest party.

One thing I am curious about is how Merkel's successor is going to handle Nord Stream 2. Merkel tried to use it as leverage against Putin but Putin walked all over her. First by denying Navalny urgent care despite his rapidly deteriorating condition(though I believe he's seen a doctor now). Then the massie Russian troop movement among Russian/Ukrainian border and Crimea('military exercise'). Then Lavrov declaring a new war in the Donbas will culminate in ''the destruction of Ukraine''.

Merkel refuses to openly condemn all this aggression which only seems to further encourage Putin. The Donbas is slowly turning into another flashpoint and Merkel just kind of seem to stand by and watch(maybe only Taiwan is more dangerous at this point). I wouldn't be surprised if the next German chancellor will have to deal with another major war on the European continent.

 

[Silvanus]

Plurality for CDU/CSU looks almost certain. I imagine a CDU-Green coalition is the likeliest outcome, though the Greens wouldn't be wise to agree to it; they'd end up in the same situation as the Lib Dems in the UK (overestimating their clout, then failing to accomplish anything of note as a junior partner, and alienating their voterbase for propping up a right-wing government).

The left-of-centre parties (SDP-Linde-Greens) would probably outnumber the right-wing parties (CDU-FDP). But various parties may think it's a bit alienating to the electorate to lock out the highest-polling party (CDU), so they might pass on the opportunity.

As a casual observer it seems you guys always end up with a center left CDU/CSU SPD coalition

The Grand Coalitions have involved the centre-right CDU as the senior partner. They haven't been centre-left.

 

[Agema]

One thing I am curious about is how Merkel's successor is going to handle Nord Stream 2. Merkel tried to use it as leverage against Putin but Putin walked all over her. First by denying Navalny urgent care despite his rapidly deteriorating condition(though I believe he's seen a doctor now). Then the massie Russian troop movement among Russian/Ukrainian border and Crimea('military exercise'). Then Lavrov declaring a new war in the Donbas will culminate in ''the destruction of Ukraine''.

Putin is overrated.

Putin's reputation rests on ostentatious obstruction of the West, tying into the general crisis of confidence the West has entered about itself. It's easy to see this overt defiance and stupid stunts as making a fool of the West, but that's just superficial. The reality is that Russia is basically going nowhere: it's a stagnant hole that is losing geopolitical power faster than it's making any.

Russia's GDP growth is embarrassingly poor - its middle income peers grow twice as fast, if not more. A country with that level of development and theoretical easy access to developed country markets you'd expect to grow about 3-5% a year (e.g. Turkey, Mexico, Brazil, etc.). It's growing about 1-1.5% pa.; Russia's GDP/capita is getting smaller compared to the USA. That's the cost of Putin's defiance: the sanctions that the West have placed it under are really hurting it. It's population is actually quite small (~140 million) and would be shrinking if it were not for ethnic Russians immigrating in from other ex-Soviet republics. It's hopelessly corrupt, sclerotic, run by some weird and unholy mess of organised criminals and ex-spies turned businessmen. Their intelligence services are semi-incompetent and leak information like a sieve. It's military is huge but dubiously competent and low morale.

The Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict has already demonstrated that Turkey is successfully undermining Russia in the Caucasus: Russia's weakness left bare for anyone to see. Putin disrupted the West in Syria, but in truth he got almost nothing from it but headlines. He's stripped a bit of land from Ukraine, at the cost of poisoning Russian-Ukrainian relations for generations. He can strip even more from Ukraine, but the bulk of it is allying with the EU and gone from Russian influence. All the meanwhile, China is happily making vast inroads to central Asia, Russia's traditional sphere of influence: the "Belt and Road" initiative is probably more damaging to Russia's power than anyone else. When people make noise about a Chinese - Russian alliance, it's like the USA and UK having an alliance: everyone knows who's the boss. Russia's going begging to China because the West cut it off, and all that means is that China will dominate Russia.

Putin presides over this state gradually slipping down the sewer in the same manner as any tinpot dictator. It's about cementing the power of him and his mates at the expense of all else. It's all very impressively showy - the military adventures, the deliberate tweaking the nose of the arrogant West, etc. and it makes Russians feel like their country still has power and needs to be respected, so they continue to back Putin even as their drown their sorrows in vodka and die before they reach 70. It's the posturing of a failing state, like Galtieri invading the Falklands to distract from Argentina's steady deterioration. Don't ever think the fact he pulls off some tricks means he's a genius and Russia is a great power.

Sure, it's at some level annoying that the EU feels it needs to buy gas from Russia. But Western Europe was giving loans and helping build infrastructure for Warsaw Pact countries in the 70s & 80s: the Cold War wasn't quite that cold, and it doesn't hurt to do some business. The USA hates Nordstream II, but the USA has nothing to gain from it where the EU does. But the EU isn't scared of Putin. It's easy and convenient to get our gas, and Putin can have European money and continue to preside over his faltering motherland. Look at it that way, and Merkel's considerably more savvy than her detractors want to characterise her as.

 

[09philj]

Plurality for CDU/CSU looks almost certain. I imagine a CDU-Green coalition is the likeliest outcome, though the Greens wouldn't be wise to agree to it; they'd end up in the same situation as the Lib Dems in the UK (overestimating their clout, then failing to accomplish anything of note as a junior partner, and alienating their voterbase for propping up a right-wing government).

Or the Irish Greens. Twice.

 

[Agema]

Plurality for CDU/CSU looks almost certain. I imagine a CDU-Green coalition is the likeliest outcome, though the Greens wouldn't be wise to agree to it; they'd end up in the same situation as the Lib Dems in the UK (overestimating their clout, then failing to accomplish anything of note as a junior partner, and alienating their voterbase for propping up a right-wing government).

It is certainly true that junior parties in a coalition often taking a beating, making their supporters unhappy because the party is part of a government enacting policy they do not believe in. However, it can also be used effectively: this would generally require a party that is fairly experienced with government and knows how to get things done. The problem with many smaller coalition partners is that they are not used to government, don't know the tricks of the trade, and the senior party will consequently run rings around them. They certainly need to know when to pull the plug.

 

[Hades]

Its curious to see the Greens do so very well in Germany while the left has been collapsing pretty much everywhere else in Europe. Everywhere the left is in crisis but in Germany they might take the reigns of governance of Europe's strongest power. Its a much needed confidence boost for the left.

 

[stroopwafel]

Putin is overrated.

Putin's reputation rests on ostentatious obstruction of the West, tying into the general crisis of confidence the West has entered about itself. It's easy to see this overt defiance and stupid stunts as making a fool of the West, but that's just superficial. The reality is that Russia is basically going nowhere: it's a stagnant hole that is losing geopolitical power faster than it's making any.

Russia's GDP growth is embarrassingly poor - its middle income peers grow twice as fast, if not more. A country with that level of development and theoretical easy access to developed country markets you'd expect to grow about 3-5% a year (e.g. Turkey, Mexico, Brazil, etc.). It's growing about 1-1.5% pa.; Russia's GDP/capita is getting smaller compared to the USA. That's the cost of Putin's defiance: the sanctions that the West have placed it under are really hurting it. It's population is actually quite small (~140 million) and would be shrinking if it were not for ethnic Russians immigrating in from other ex-Soviet republics. It's hopelessly corrupt, sclerotic, run by some weird and unholy mess of organised criminals and ex-spies turned businessmen. Their intelligence services are semi-incompetent and leak information like a sieve. It's military is huge but dubiously competent and low morale.

The Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict has already demonstrated that Turkey is successfully undermining Russia in the Caucasus: Russia's weakness left bare for anyone to see. Putin disrupted the West in Syria, but in truth he got almost nothing from it but headlines. He's stripped a bit of land from Ukraine, at the cost of poisoning Russian-Ukrainian relations for generations. He can strip even more from Ukraine, but the bulk of it is allying with the EU and gone from Russian influence. All the meanwhile, China is happily making vast inroads to central Asia, Russia's traditional sphere of influence: the "Belt and Road" initiative is probably more damaging to Russia's power than anyone else. When people make noise about a Chinese - Russian alliance, it's like the USA and UK having an alliance: everyone knows who's the boss. Russia's going begging to China because the West cut it off, and all that means is that China will dominate Russia.

Putin presides over this state gradually slipping down the sewer in the same manner as any tinpot dictator. It's about cementing the power of him and his mates at the expense of all else. It's all very impressively showy - the military adventures, the deliberate tweaking the nose of the arrogant West, etc. and it makes Russians feel like their country still has power and needs to be respected, so they continue to back Putin even as their drown their sorrows in vodka and die before they reach 70. It's the posturing of a failing state, like Galtieri invading the Falklands to distract from Argentina's steady deterioration. Don't ever think the fact he pulls off some tricks means he's a genius and Russia is a great power.

Sure, it's at some level annoying that the EU feels it needs to buy gas from Russia. But Western Europe was giving loans and helping build infrastructure for Warsaw Pact countries in the 70s & 80s: the Cold War wasn't quite that cold, and it doesn't hurt to do some business. The USA hates Nordstream II, but the USA has nothing to gain from it where the EU does. But the EU isn't scared of Putin. It's easy and convenient to get our gas, and Putin can have European money and continue to preside over his faltering motherland. Look at it that way, and Merkel's considerably more savvy than her detractors want to characterise her as.

Excellent analysis but at the same time Russia having less and less to lose makes it more dangerous. I think you underestimate the strategic implioations of Nord Stream 2. If Germany is willing to sacrifice Ukraine to secure their Nord Stream 2 gas supply(as they would no longer need the country for transit making the country as dependent on Russian gas, with corresponding leverage, as Belarus) then that will be a huge boon to Putin. Like everytime he's prodding how far he can go and everytime there is very little pushback. Russia might be an economically weak country with a demoralized military but none the less is it seeking out confrontations while the European countries do very little to even marginally increase their military budget. Russia might be weak but it isn't lethargic like much of western Europe. This used to not really be a problem since Europe could always rely on the U.S. for their security but this era has ended. Meanwhile Putin is ordering massive placements of troops among the Russian/Ukrainian border and the European countries still just kinda stand and watch. If Ukraine falls then E.U. countries like the baltics and Poland will start shitting bricks.

 

[Agema]

Excellent analysis but at the same time Russia having less and less to lose makes it more dangerous.

By that logic Nordstream II should go ahead, because otherwise Russia would have less to lose and be more dangerous.

I think you underestimate the strategic implioations of Nord Stream 2. If Germany is willing to sacrifice Ukraine to secure their Nord Stream 2 gas supply(as they would no longer need the country for transit making the country as dependent on Russian gas, with corresponding leverage, as Belarus) then that will be a huge boon to Putin. Like everytime he's prodding how far he can go and everytime there is very little pushback. Russia might be an economically weak country with a demoralized military but none the less is it seeking out confrontations while the European countries do very little to even marginally increase their military budget. Russia might be weak but it isn't lethargic like much of western Europe. This used to not really be a problem since Europe could always rely on the U.S. for their security but this era has ended. Meanwhile Putin is ordering massive placements of troops among the Russian/Ukrainian border and the European countries still just kinda stand and watch. If Ukraine falls then E.U. countries like the baltics and Poland will start shitting bricks.

Russia can invade Ukraine, and very little more. And if it does invade Ukraine, what's it actually going to do with it? We've seen plenty about what happens when countries try to occupy hostile territory recently. I guess it can strip off a chunk of eastern Ukraine from Crimea to Kharkov and annex it, where the population may be sufficiently Russophile that they'll accept that. That can be justified to their crappy military as defence of ethnic Russians in Ukraine. Try to send them into much else, it'll feel like dying for a tyrant's glory.

The EU & UK has a population of 500 million, well over three times Russia's, and even spending a teeny 1.2% GDP average this colossally outclasses Russia. And that's assuming the USA doesn't decide to involve itself (which it would be obliged to for pretty much anything except Ukraine), in which case it's a truly loltastic mismatch. The Russian air force has technically got one hell of a lot of planes, but not that many competitive modern ones to win an air war. In any conflict, the European nations (I assume the UK would join in with the EU) alone would sweep the Russian air force from the sky, and that's the end of that because no modern army is going anywhere without adequate air support.

Putin likes dicking around with his military because it makes him look tough, and because he's interested in trying to make the West blink and respond, which makes Russia look more credible. NATO needs to be alert, but not to gratify Putin by running round at his beck and call.