Don’t you think it makes more sense to actually discuss the article linked here instead of having a general discussion about party politics and what media allegedly prefers who?
Especially since the article contains opinions that completely align with the commentator who criticised it so harshly.
The actual article: “The death of the unloved “traffic-light” coalition is long overdue. Fractious, unable to grapple with Germany’s deep-seated economic woes, and incompetently managed…”. Yeah, no party politics there…
Followed by straight out lying (“Yet the coalition had set its face against any new version of the covid-recovery fund that has injected hundreds of billions of euros into European economies in the past three years.”) as actually the conservative opposition sued them before the constitutional court.
But sure the debt brake “urgently needs reform, which in turn requires a new government”… one let by the moronic conservatives with an austerity fetish who actually put that bullshit into the constitution in the first place.
So let’s not talk about party politics as that’s not what the article is about… 🤡
The political equivalent to “one of the sheep broke through the fence and was killed outside, but luckily we have a plan to get rid of the fence -a questionable concept anyway- and let a pack of wolves guard them now” is a totally reasonable take… if you are stupid or your primary concern is to promote conservatives wolves.
The death of the unloved “traffic-light” coalition is long overdue.
…which is a sentiment almost unanimously spread across Germany. I.e. also including those that align themselves with one of the partaking parties. No party politics (conservative spin?) here.
Also, you omitted the part where it stated that such a coalition would in no case be fit to stand up against Trump, which is the point made to justify the opening “long overdue death”. Would you disagree with this assessment?
Your cited passage:
Europe needs more joint money for Ukraine and a large EU budget for defence. Yet the coalition had set its face against any new version of the covid-recovery fund that has injected hundreds of billions of euros into European economies in the past three years.
Of course the Union had a blast sueing the coalition. But it wasn’t who sued them that made it illegal but the constitution. In my world, it shouldn’t matter who sues to determine if something is illegal or not.
But sure the debt brake “urgently needs reform, which in turn requires a new government”…
Well, yes it does! The traffic light coalition wasn’t willing/able to overcome the debt brake and exploded due to this issue. So now a new government is needed. I see no party politics here. Could well be a new government with Olaf and others willing to cancel the debt brake.
one let by the moronic conservatives with an austerity fetish who actually put that bullshit into the constitution in the first place.
This is coming entirely from you and is not part of the article in the slightest. As stated several times already, it even makes clear claims against the debt brake.
So let’s not talk about party politics as that’s not what the article is about…
Exactly. The one being so strongly agitated by this article is you and I really wonder what you read into it that it makes you so angry. This isn’t a conservatives vs social democrats text in the slightest but instead makes some general yet interesting points about the state of affairs in Europe given the arising challenges in our future.
A future, mind you, where it is vital for us to stand together against pressures from the outside instead of being completely self-absorbed and losing ourselves in petty disputes. Which is why I find it so strange that you chose to be offended instead of trying to listen to the author.
you omitted the part where it stated that such a coalition would in no case be fit to stand up against Trump
And? “They would not be fit to stand up against Trump” is a statement as baseless as “that coalition needed to die”. Just because they are a neo-liberal rag hating on a government not sharing their delusion doesn’t make it true. I ommited that part because it adds nothing. I could have used that quote instead of the one about the hated coalition finally dying for the exact same argument.
But it wasn’t who sued them that made it illegal but the constitution.
That’s only half the story. They sued for a practice they used a hundred of times in the past. Not because it makes sense, not because it will improve anything (in fact that strict interpretation of the law will make their future work as well as all state governments harder). They did it because they saw a chance to obstruct the government, consequences be damned.
Could well be a new government with Olaf and others willing to cancel the debt brake.
No it can’t. Because just like this article “the government is bad and incompetent and tries to destroy Germany!!!” is screamed by every noe.liberal rag out- but especially inside Germany for 3 years. And then boosted by right-wing propagandists on social media, too.
There is no alternativer government in Germany’s future. It’s either tone-deaf conservatives with a debt fetish (and a million other issues like corruption, fossil fuel addiction, Russia-cuddling) or nazis. Or both if the constant shift of conservatives to parrot far-right propaganda and populism and their totally insane statements basically calling all actual democratic parties off-limits for coalition for often absurd reasons is any indication.
This is coming entirely from you and is not part of the article in the slightest.
No, this is coming from reality. If telling you a simple well-known and documented fact is “talking about party politics” you really can’t be helped anymore because you are either trolling or intentionally ignoring reality.
This isn’t a conservatives vs social democrats text in the slightest
Yes it is. “The coalition of all other democratic parties has failed as it should! We need a new government!” is exactly that. It is the statement to go back to moronic conservative policies of slow decay and corruption or abandon democracy. Those are the two option in actual reality. But guessing irrelevant facts like polls and party programs would be “party politics”, too…
A future, mind you, where it is vital for us to stand together against pressures from the outside instead of being completely self-absorbed and losing ourselves in petty disputes.
There is no future of standing together against the outside. There is an inside danger of going back to slow decay… only that it’s actually accelarating right now. There is an inside danger of nazis coming back to power in Germany. And there is an inside danger of both happening (as the faction of decay and corruption is already testing the waters how much lies about foreigners being to blame for everything the public accepts without backlash). And then there are the few remaining other democratic parties. You know… the coalition that needed to die because they were so utterly incompetent that infrastructure decaying for decades under conservative rule decided to crumble from utter frustration, so helpless that even electrons got confused and wouldn’t pass those totally modern 1980s copper cables fast enough anymore, so stupid that the poor people in the country had no choice but to listen to Russian trolls and vote for literal nazis.
But I know… that’s too much party politics for you. Just say you didn’t know anything when you wake up in ruins. Did work for most people the last time, too.
Don’t you think it makes more sense to actually discuss the article linked here instead of having a general discussion about party politics and what media allegedly prefers who?
Especially since the article contains opinions that completely align with the commentator who criticised it so harshly.
deleted by creator
The actual article: “The death of the unloved “traffic-light” coalition is long overdue. Fractious, unable to grapple with Germany’s deep-seated economic woes, and incompetently managed…”. Yeah, no party politics there…
Followed by straight out lying (“Yet the coalition had set its face against any new version of the covid-recovery fund that has injected hundreds of billions of euros into European economies in the past three years.”) as actually the conservative opposition sued them before the constitutional court.
But sure the debt brake “urgently needs reform, which in turn requires a new government”… one let by the moronic conservatives with an austerity fetish who actually put that bullshit into the constitution in the first place.
So let’s not talk about party politics as that’s not what the article is about… 🤡
The political equivalent to “one of the sheep broke through the fence and was killed outside, but luckily we have a plan to get rid of the fence -a questionable concept anyway- and let a pack of wolves guard them now” is a totally reasonable take… if you are stupid or your primary concern is to promote
conservativeswolves.…which is a sentiment almost unanimously spread across Germany. I.e. also including those that align themselves with one of the partaking parties. No party politics (conservative spin?) here. Also, you omitted the part where it stated that such a coalition would in no case be fit to stand up against Trump, which is the point made to justify the opening “long overdue death”. Would you disagree with this assessment?
Your cited passage:
Of course the Union had a blast sueing the coalition. But it wasn’t who sued them that made it illegal but the constitution. In my world, it shouldn’t matter who sues to determine if something is illegal or not.
Well, yes it does! The traffic light coalition wasn’t willing/able to overcome the debt brake and exploded due to this issue. So now a new government is needed. I see no party politics here. Could well be a new government with Olaf and others willing to cancel the debt brake.
This is coming entirely from you and is not part of the article in the slightest. As stated several times already, it even makes clear claims against the debt brake.
Exactly. The one being so strongly agitated by this article is you and I really wonder what you read into it that it makes you so angry. This isn’t a conservatives vs social democrats text in the slightest but instead makes some general yet interesting points about the state of affairs in Europe given the arising challenges in our future.
A future, mind you, where it is vital for us to stand together against pressures from the outside instead of being completely self-absorbed and losing ourselves in petty disputes. Which is why I find it so strange that you chose to be offended instead of trying to listen to the author.
And? “They would not be fit to stand up against Trump” is a statement as baseless as “that coalition needed to die”. Just because they are a neo-liberal rag hating on a government not sharing their delusion doesn’t make it true. I ommited that part because it adds nothing. I could have used that quote instead of the one about the hated coalition finally dying for the exact same argument.
That’s only half the story. They sued for a practice they used a hundred of times in the past. Not because it makes sense, not because it will improve anything (in fact that strict interpretation of the law will make their future work as well as all state governments harder). They did it because they saw a chance to obstruct the government, consequences be damned.
No it can’t. Because just like this article “the government is bad and incompetent and tries to destroy Germany!!!” is screamed by every noe.liberal rag out- but especially inside Germany for 3 years. And then boosted by right-wing propagandists on social media, too.
There is no alternativer government in Germany’s future. It’s either tone-deaf conservatives with a debt fetish (and a million other issues like corruption, fossil fuel addiction, Russia-cuddling) or nazis. Or both if the constant shift of conservatives to parrot far-right propaganda and populism and their totally insane statements basically calling all actual democratic parties off-limits for coalition for often absurd reasons is any indication.
No, this is coming from reality. If telling you a simple well-known and documented fact is “talking about party politics” you really can’t be helped anymore because you are either trolling or intentionally ignoring reality.
Yes it is. “The coalition of all other democratic parties has failed as it should! We need a new government!” is exactly that. It is the statement to go back to moronic conservative policies of slow decay and corruption or abandon democracy. Those are the two option in actual reality. But guessing irrelevant facts like polls and party programs would be “party politics”, too…
There is no future of standing together against the outside. There is an inside danger of going back to slow decay… only that it’s actually accelarating right now. There is an inside danger of nazis coming back to power in Germany. And there is an inside danger of both happening (as the faction of decay and corruption is already testing the waters how much lies about foreigners being to blame for everything the public accepts without backlash). And then there are the few remaining other democratic parties. You know… the coalition that needed to die because they were so utterly incompetent that infrastructure decaying for decades under conservative rule decided to crumble from utter frustration, so helpless that even electrons got confused and wouldn’t pass those totally modern 1980s copper cables fast enough anymore, so stupid that the poor people in the country had no choice but to listen to Russian trolls and vote for literal nazis.
But I know… that’s too much party politics for you. Just say you didn’t know anything when you wake up in ruins. Did work for most people the last time, too.
Your whole tirading always fails at this point, because the article criticises the debt brake. You bark up the wrong tree.