Per ogni partito politico che abbia superato lo sbarramento del 5% è riportata la percentuale dei voti per classe di età.
I relativi commenti saranno condotti esclusivamente sulla base di criteri demografici.
Union, ossia la Cdu e la Csu sommate assieme, ha ottenuto il 33% dei voti validi.
La grafica è particolarmente espressiva.
L’Union è il partito dei vecchi. Sopra i 70 anni è stata votata dal 45% degli elettori, percentuale che sprofonda al 23% nella classe 18 – 24 ed al 26 % in quella 25 – 34.
Sono le due classi di età alle quali appartengono i giovani adulti in cerca di lavoro, oppure occupati con Mini Arbeit, con resa economica oscillante tra i 600 e gli 800 euro mensili medi.
Questa distribuzione evidenzia bene la disaffezione delle classi giovani dalla visione politica, economica e sociale dell’Union.
A quadro politico invariato, tra due tornate elettorali l’Union è proiettata sotto il 20%.
Spd, socialdemocrazia, ha ottenuto il 20% dei voti validi.
Come nel caso della Union, anche l’Spd presenta percentuali di voto basse nelle classi di età dei giovani adulti, verosimilmente per gli stessi motivi della Union.
Aumenta, ma di poco, nelle classi adulte, e raggiunge un massimo del 25% in quella dei vecchi.
A quadro politico invariato, tra due tornate elettorali l’Spd è proiettata sotto il 12%.
Linke, ultrasinistra ex comunista, ha ottenuto il 9% dei voti validi.
La distribuzione dei suffragi è abbastanza omogenea nelle diverse classi di età, per quanto quelle dei giovani adulti presentino le occorrenza maggiori.
Questo voto sembrerebbe riflettere le difficoltà per i giovani adulti di trovare un posto di lavoro stabile. Le percentuali maggiori sono addensate nelle zone ad alta concentrazione industriale.
Grüne, ecologisti, hanno ottenuto il 10% dei voti validi.
Il comportamento per classi di età è alquanto anomalo, presentando basse occorrenze nella classe degli anziani ed in quella dei vecchi, mentre la classe 18 – 24 evidenzia un picco percentuale al 14%.
FDP, Freie Demokratische Partei, ha ottenuto il 10 % dei voti validi.
Lascia alquanto stupiti la sua distribuzione sostanzialmente omogenea nelle diverse classi di età.
Afd, Alternative für Deutschland, ha ottenuto il 14% dei voti validi.
Presenta un andamento particolare: basse percentuali di voto nella classe 18 24 ed in quella dei vecchi, 10% ed 8%, rispettivamente, raggiunge il picco del 17% in quella compresa tra i 34 ed i 44 anni.
A quadro politico invariato, tra due tornate elettorali l’AfD è proiettata sopra il 19%.
Riassumendo.
I partiti tradizionali tedeschi, Union ed Spd hanno una presa molto minore sulle classi giovani rispetto a quelle adulte o vecchie.
Ciò fa prevedere, da un punto di vista strettamente demografico, un loro costante calo percentuale nel tempo.
Solo i Grüne ed AfD evidenziano un supporto giovanile consistente, fattore demografico che ne prospetta la crescita nel tempo.
Cerchiamo di chiarire immediatamente alcuni concetti.
Gli adepti dell’ideologia liberal e del socialismo ideologico bollano con i termini di “populismo”, “estrema destra”, “fascisti”, “nazisti”, “xenofobi”, “razzisti”, “nazionalisti” e così via tutti i movimenti culturali o politici e tutte le persone che non la pensano esattamente come loro.
L’uso indiscriminato di tali termini li ha fatto transitare da specifiche indicazioni di un certo quale contenuto a meri insulti di riprovazione. Ma con gli insulti non si guadagnano voti: li si perdono, come hanno dimostrato le recenti elezioni tedesche.
Non è motivo di scandalo che AfD sia entrata nel Bundestag: è motivo di scandalo che vi siedano ancora partiti liberal e socialisti.
*
Abbiamo già porto alcune interpretazioni del termine “populista”.
«In Europa il “populismo” vale circa 55 milioni di voti, governa in Polonia, Ungheria e Grecia ed è nei governi di nove stati dell’Unione. È sottorappresentato nei parlamenti rispetto alla sua presenza percentuale a causa dei sistemi elettorali ….
In linea generale, si potrebbe tentare di definire il populismo come
«movimento politico privo di ideologia od idee preconcette, che si rifà soltanto alle esigenze che emergono dalla gente comune piuttosto che dalle élite.» ….
Denominare anti-establishment i populisti è comodo ma riduttivo: la caratteristica dei populisti è quella di personificare un metodo di pensiero ed azione empirico, non supervisionato.
Altro tratto peculiare dei populisti è quello di rifarsi alle tradizioni popolari religiose, storiche, culturali, privilegiando l’attenzione alla condizione economica della gente comune: nessuno misconosce l’importanza ed il ruolo dei ricchi, ma i populisti sono più attenti alle esigenze delle classi reddituali medio – basse. E questo costituisce un punto di forza nelle nazioni dove si vota a suffragio universale: anche i meno benestanti votano.»
* * * * * * * *
Ripetiamo solo per chiarezza: i populisti propugnano una Weltanschauung incardinata sul retaggio religioso, storico, culturale, sociale ed artistico di un popolo: di tutto il popolo, non della sola élite. I populisti ascoltano cosa prova e sente la gente comune: non vogliono imporre loro nulla.
La differenza con l’ideologia liberal e quella del socialismo è stridente: semplicemente l’opposto. Liberal e socialismo ideologico vogliono imporre la loro ideologia, e lo fanno sia con leggi sia con sentenze di tribunali: i populisti invece vogliono sentire cosa pensi il popolo, quello sovrano.
*
Un anno e mezzo or sono uscì questo articolo, che fu facilmente profetico:
«Heimat è un vocabolo tedesco che non ha un corrispettivo nella lingua italiana. Similmente, il vocabolo “Heimat” non ha un corrispettivo in lingue come l’inglese o le lingue neolatine. Esiste, invece, un corrispettivo in alcune lingue slave: “dòmovina” in sloveno, croato e serbo e “domov” nella lingua ceca e in lingua greca: “πατρίς, πατρίδος” (grc. moderno “πατρίδα”).
Il concetto di Heimat si sviluppò nella cultura tedesca a metà del XIX secolo, allorché la nascente industrializzazione si accompagnava, in Germania, all’esodo massiccio di popolazione dalle aree rurali verso le grandi città, e contemporaneamente l’unificazione politica della Germania comportava il dissolvimento dei piccoli stati in un unico nuovo Stato tedesco a egemonia prussiana. L’Heimat venne interpretata come una reazione all’alienazione e alla perdita di identità della comunità di origine, un aspetto della cultura tedesca di significato inizialmente patriottico e non nazionalistico.
*
Viene spesso tradotto con “Casa”, “Piccola patria”, o “Luogo natio” e indica il territorio in cui ci si sente a casa propria perché vi si è nati, vi si è trascorsa l’infanzia, o vi si parla la lingua degli affetti.» [Fonte]
*
Guardate ora con attenzione la fotografia iniziale: AfD altro non è che il movimento politico che ha per scopo il ricostituire nella sua dignità il concetto di Heimat. Propone, non impone.
Nulla di vergognoso, quindi, nulla che assomigli nemmeno lontanamente ai nefasti movimenti ideologici del secolo scorso, nulla di potenzialmente dittatoriale.
Weltanschauung opposta, come dicemmo, a quella liberal e del socialismo ideologico.
Questi hanno reagito con la tecnica della demonizzazione
Ma se questa manovra può abbindolare qualche persona prona a credere a qualsiasi propaganda, la gente comune, quella che deve combattere per sbarcare il lunario, la tiene in non cale.
AfD parla come mangia: si fa capire.
Questa tornata elettorale in Germania conferma come in Occidente sia in atto una imponente devoluzione dell’ideologia liberal e del socialismo ideologico: i partiti politici che seguivano tale corrente di pensiero hanno perso le elezioni in America, Regno Unito, Francia e Germania. Socialisti e “progressisti” sono stati cacciati via dalle sale del potere. Sono oramai un cascame politico e sociale, che ha ancora un grande potere dominando gli apparati burocratici, ma storicamente sconfitto, e sconfitto in modo irreversibile.
AfD non è un “partito anti-establishment“: è un partito propositivo, e che ha molto da dire.
* * * * * * * *
Bene.
Adesso AfD ha 94 deputati nel Bundestag ove Union (Cdu e Csu) hanno riportato un bruciante ridimensionamento e l’Spd è scesa ai suoi minimi storici.
Che Frau Merkel abbia vinto perché ha perso quasi cento deputati lo si vada a raccontare altrove.
Ci si augura che i partiti tradizionali proseguano sulla linea finora perseguita, che si è rivelata essere il mezzo migliore per annientarli. La devoluzione deve proseguire fino alla loro totale scomparsa.
«Social democrats have shaped Western Europe more than any other political movement.»
*
«Are social democratic parties still the parties of workers?»
*
«No one knows what exactly social democracy stands for anymore.»
*
«In 2000, social democrats or socialists were part of the government in 10 out of the 15 countries that made up the European Union at the time.»
*
«These days, though, the picture is a drastically different one»
*
«center-left parties would only be part of six EU governments out of 28 member states, all of them on the European periphery: Malta, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Slovakia and the Czech Republic»
*
«Elections are scheduled for October in the Czech Republic, but it seems unlikely that the social democrats will be returned to power»
* * * * * * * * * * *
Alcune considerazioni fluirebbero spontanee.
– Tutte le ideologie hanno la caratteristica comune di essere rigide: vogliono imporre la loro Weltanschauung ma sono tetragone al recepimento degli stimoli esterni. Si considerano immutabili nel tempo, quasi fossero religioni, ed in effetti come tali sono percepite.
– Tuttavia, lo si voglia o meno, lo si accetti o meno, tutto muta nel tempo. E quando un sistema ideologico non riesce a percepire il reale cessa di saperlo interpretare e, quindi, indirizzare. Alla fine crolla sotto il peso delle sue contraddizioni.
– Di fronte al fatto nuovo l’empirista si domanda cosa sia più opportuno fare, mentre l’ideologo si interroga su come l’ideologia consentirebbe di risolvere il problema. Ma l’ideologia inquadra problemi pregressi: è inidonea ad affrontare i problemi attuali e, a maggior ragione, quelli futuri.
«Complesso di facoltà psichiche e mentali che consentono all’uomo di pensare, comprendere o spiegare i fatti o le azioni, elaborare modelli astratti della realtà, intendere e farsi intendere dagli altri, giudicare, e lo rendono insieme capace di adattarsi a situazioni nuove e di modificare la situazione stessa quando questa presenta ostacoli all’adattamento»
Il punto nodale è una brevissima frase:
«capace di adattarsi a situazioni nuove»
La duttilità di pensiero necessaria per affrontare e dominare il nuovo è esattamente l’antitesi di ogni ideologia. L’ideologia per definizione non evolve né può evolvere: di conseguenza è destinata a scomparire.
Nulla da stupirsi quindi della devoluzione del socialismo ideologico o, per dirla con lo Spiegel, della morte delle socialdemocrazie europee.
Across Europe, social democratic parties are in crisis and on Sunday, the German SPD could slide to its worst result since World War II. What has happened to the once-glorious center-left parties on the Continent? And how can they recover?
*
On a recent late summer evening, Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern pulled into Illmitz, in Austria’s Burgenland, in a tour bus not unlike those used by rock stars. He was greeted with cheers and a brass band before making his way through a throng of selfie-hunters at a local trade union festival to reach the stage, in front of which some 200 people were gathered to hear him speak.
His speech focused on the “Austrian Dream,” and he outlined his own journey from a humble background to the very top. He talked about Austria and what people were telling him about their concerns, outlining a plan to turn the country back into a place where everyone “gets the chance to have a successful life.” It was the kind of rhetoric you would normally expect from an American president, not an Austrian Social Democrat.
Yet despite him being a good candidate, despite running a good campaign and despite the country’s solid economy, with unemployment at 5.7 percent and economic growth topping 2 percent, Kern and his party, the Social Democratic Party of Austria (SPÖ), are failing to gain traction. His country’s economy is even better shape than Germany’s, yet the SPÖ has been polling at 22 to 28 percent for months now — far from enough to win the Oct. 15 general election.
Kern, 51, headed the Austrian national railroad before becoming chancellor last year. He was responsible for making sure that special trains were provided during the 2015 refugee crisis. And he forced the hapless former chancellor, Werner Faymann, out of office. Kern’s team is young and motivated, with hardly anyone on his bus older than their late 30s, and he has multimedia experts to manage his social media presence. But absent a miracle, Kern will have to step down after the election.
One reason, of course, is Sebastian Kurz, Kern’s 31-year-old challenger. Kurz has rebranded his party, the Austrian conservatives, and is betting on his youth and staunch anti-Islam stance. In polls comparing the two on an individual basis, Kern and Kurz are basically neck-and-neck — but next to his young challenger, the incumbent chancellor nevertheless looks like the status quo. Despite everything, Austrian voters associate the current chancellor with old, sclerotic social democracy.
In 2000, social democrats or socialists were part of the government in 10 out of the 15 countries that made up the European Union at the time. These days, though, the picture is a drastically different one. There is a real chance that German Social Democrats will no longer be part of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition following Sunday’s vote and the same could happen in Italy after voters there go to the polls next spring. Were that to happen, center-left parties would only be part of six EU governments out of 28 member states, all of them on the European periphery: Malta, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. The populist left-wing Syriza alliance heads the government in Greece. Elections are scheduled for October in the Czech Republic, but it seems unlikely that the social democrats will be returned to power.
There is even a new word for the social democratic swoon: Pasokization, as in PASOK, Greece’s long-term governing party, which fell into insignificance in the 2015 election. A similar situation applies in the Netherlands, where the traditional Labor Party captured only 5.7 percent of votes in the last election. French Socialist Party candidate Benoît Hamon came in fifth in the recent French presidential election, with 6.4 percent of the vote, and his party went on to receive a miserable 9.5 percent of the vote in parliamentary elections a short time later. In Poland, the Social Democrats no longer hold any seats in the parliament.
It is a puzzling development given the desire held by many voters for greater social security. Indeed, that desire could help explain the rapid, yet brief, rise of Social Democratic chancellor candidate Martin Schulz in the polls earlier this year. Indeed, the SPD came within a single percentage point of Merkel’s conservatives — only to plunge again. That dive certainly had something to do with the SPD’s uninspiring campaign, and with Schulz’s own apparent inability to win over voters. But there was also a bigger problem: No one knows what exactly social democracy stands for anymore.
This is astonishing. Weren’t people proclaiming a comeback for strong state governance and the end of financial capitalism after the 2008 financial crisis? Isn’t the gap between rich and poor widening almost everywhere in Europe? Don’t voters have several good reasons to vote social democratic?
Social democrats have shaped Western Europe more than any other political movement. Their ideas are now taken for granted among large segments of the middle class: principles like the social welfare state; the notion that the strong bear some responsibility for weaker members of society; and the idea that everyone should have the same opportunity to participate in society. Those are the philosophical underpinnings of social democracy, yet social democratic parties are no longer benefitting from these ideas.
Splintered Electorate
Martin Schulz has made “social justice” the central issue of his campaign, but the working class, once the key constituency of social democracy, has been fragmented into a well-paid core workforce and a periphery of temporary workers who often do the same work for less money. Others are stuck in dead-end service jobs. Are social democratic parties still the parties of workers? Or is this just a distant memory to which educated, upwardly mobile public servants cling to? That, at least, is what the SPD factions in state parliaments and the Bundestag make it look like.
I francese hanno dato a Mr Macron una terrificante mazzata sul cranio.
Dei 171 seggi in palio alle elezioni per il rinnovo di metà del senato avrebbero eletto 146 – 156 senatori dell’opposizione e solo 22 di partito di Mr Macron.
Quando saranno disponibili i dati definitivi, allora potremo fare dei commenti.
Per il momento basti dire che anche Mr Macron è andato incontro ad una débâcle.
The Latest on France’s Senate election (all times local):
7:40 p.m.
Partial official results show France’s conservatives on track to keep their majority in the Senate, with President Emmanuel Macron’s party trailing as his popularity suffers.
Interior Ministry results after Sunday’s vote showed the conservative Republicans keeping most of their seats and gaining a few. A senator from Macron’s Republic on the Move! party said it came in third place.
Around half of the 348 Senate seats were up for grabs in Sunday’s vote. Senators are not chosen by public vote, but by elected officials.
French broadcasters’ projections say the conservatives will have between 146 and 156 seats overall after Sunday’s vote, with around 22 for Macron’s party, which was only created last year.
The results damage Macron’s legitimacy but should not prevent him from passing key promised changes to France’s economy because the conservatives back them too.
Chi chiedesse ad un tedesco come sta, si sentirebbe rispondere “Alles in Ordnung“: tutto bene.
Ma in effetti il nostro amico tedesco ha risposto che tutto è in ordine, quindi tutto va bene.
Il popolo tedesco ha un atavico terrore del nuovo e dei cambiamenti: teme l’incognita insita nel mutamento, apprezza la stabilità anche se scomoda e non soddisfacente.
L’incubo di ogni buon tedesco è il chaos, esattamente come un partenopeo temerebbe un traffico rigidamente controllato.
Questo modo di sentire porta inevitabilmente a situazioni conflittuali: si indossa male l’abito vecchio ma nel contempo si teme quello nuovo.
Così domenica 24 i tedeschi voteranno una riedizione del passato governo, pur non essendone stati soddisfatti.
*
Handelsblatt, il giornale della confindustria tedesca, fotografa bene questa situazione.
«It’s one of the strange anomalies of this election …. they will vote for the status quo, and against Mr. Schulz, anyway»
*
«a majority of Germans agree with the government’s policy and even want more leadership»
*
«opinions about whether there should be a cap on the number of refugees: Six out of ten Germans favor that»
*
«Germans also think conservatively when it comes to the future of the European Union, with just under 16 percent in favor of additional powers for Brussels, while 37 percent want more rights transferred back to Europe’s nation states»
*
«Germans want more Europe when it comes to defense policy, foreign policy and the European-wide recognition of educational qualifications»
*
«the vast majority are not ready to sign up for a pan-European, fiscal utopia or a European finance minister»
*
«They want to retain sovereignty over their income and expenditure»
*
«Paris is envisaging pots of money, Berlin sees additional supervisory authorities»
*
«Just under a third (31 percent) want better relations with Russia, while only 22.5 percent want Germany to distance itself further from Russia.»
*
«These desired changes will be difficult for Ms. Merkel»
* * * * * * * *
Sembrerebbe delinearsi una situazione di riedizione di una stanca Große Koalition, altamente conflittuale nel suo interno e condizionata severamente nei suoi rapporti di politica estera.
Ma quando il 70.6% dei tedeschi reclama una nuova legge sull’immigrazione ed il 59.7% reclama un tetto massimo al numero degli immigrati dovrebbe essere ben chiaro ciò che vorrebbero i tedeschi.
Che poi voteranno ciò che passa il convento, nell’attesa che AfD si consolidi, cresca e possa proporsi come forza di governo.
A new study shows Germans wish Berlin would govern differently and points to immigration, security and fiscal sovereignty.
*
German voters are ready for change. At least, that’s what a survey by the Allensbach Institute, commissioned by Handelsblatt, suggests. However that is not what they are going to get with the next administration. Nor is it what they are going to vote for come Sunday, according to the most recent polls, which continue to suggest that the current chancellor will be voted back into power for a fourth term.
Even though his election could mean change, Martin Schulz, the main competition for Angela Merkel’s job as chancellor, effectively has no prospect of being elected. It’s one of the strange anomalies of this election. They greet Mr. Schulz, the leader of the Social Democratic Party, or SPD, with cheers when he appears in public and they jeer and boo Ms. Merkel. But they will vote for the status quo, and against Mr. Schulz, anyway.
In many cases, the Allensbach study shows that desire for change transcends the usual political categories of left and right, progressive and conservative.
On some issues, a majority of Germans agree with the government’s policy and even want more leadership, for example, on topics like climate change. Over 90 percent of Germans believe the current policy for the environment is right, or even want to expand it. It’s a similar situation with development aid for Africa, which the German government has rediscovered in recent months as a means of preventing a new influx of refugees; 39 percent of Germans want more development aid, while only 12 percent would reduce it.
On other issues though, Germans are fundamentally opposed to the government and almost all the major parties. This includes opinions about whether there should be a cap on the number of refugees: Six out of ten Germans favor that. But this position is only supported by the more conservative Christian Social Union, or CSU, the Bavarian sister party to Ms. Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats; and by the Alternative for Germany, or AfD, a right-wing populist party founded in 2013.
The problem with such a complex and often contradictory wish list is which party to vote for. “I’d have to found a new party myself if I wanted to see all my wishes granted,” replies Renate Köcher, head of the Allensbach Institute, adding that the major parties like the CDU and SPD have become weaker over the past few years, while minor parties, especially those that offer a more radical point of view, have become stronger.
So the situation before Germans cast their ballots Sunday, is clearly more complicated than it looks at first. The question for now: Where do German voters want to see change, and where will they actually get it?
Closer to the EU
Germans also think conservatively when it comes to the future of the European Union, with just under 16 percent in favor of additional powers for Brussels, while 37 percent want more rights transferred back to Europe’s nation states.
“The Germans are staunch Europeans in principle. But they have clear ideas about where more integration would be desirable and where nation states should maintain their autonomy,” said Ms. Kocher.
Germans want more Europe when it comes to defense policy, foreign policy and the European-wide recognition of educational qualifications. However, the vast majority are not ready to sign up for a pan-European, fiscal utopia or a European finance minister. “They want to retain sovereignty over their income and expenditure,” Ms. Köcher said.
In some ways this may be the explanation for the different attitudes toward Mr. Schulz and Ms. Merkel. Mr. Schulz, the former president of the European Parliament, is a staunch proponent of the EU and as such he comes across as trustworthy and honestly enthusiastic. However there’s no doubt that many Germans fear his enthusiasm will translate into too much EU.
Ms. Merkel faces a dilemma when it comes to this topic. France’s new president, Emmanuel Macron, is eager for reform – which means she finally has a serious ally in Paris. And according to the Allensbach survey, 39 percent of Germans want a closer relationship with France under Emmanuel Macron.
“Strengthening the EU is a subject where you can get your fingers burnt.”
Axel Wallrabenstein, political communications consultant
Yet Mr. Macron is also a fan of closer European financial integration. Ms. Merkel and her finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, can also envisage a European finance minister and a European monetary fund but they have very different ideas from the new French administration. Paris is envisaging pots of money, Berlin sees additional supervisory authorities.
“Strengthening the EU is a subject where you can get your fingers burnt,” said Berlin-based political and communications consultant, Axel Wallrabenstein. “What is crucial is how you sell the next steps toward integration. If the new government makes it clear that the EU is dealing with the issues that are overwhelming nation states – such as security policy, finances and structural support – the strong axis of Germany and France can bring Europe a big step forward.”
Still, given the divided attitude that German voters have toward the EU’s powers and a closer financial union, perhaps it is no surprise that, for the time being, Ms. Merkel’s tactic is to postpone all the important questions on EU policy until after the election.
Foreign Policy
In terms of foreign policy, German voters have expressed desire for change there too. Just under a third (31 percent) want better relations with Russia, while only 22.5 percent want Germany to distance itself further from Russia.
Germans living in the east of the country in particular want closer connections between Berlin and Moscow.
Meanwhile, 35 percent of Germans think Germany should distance itself more from the United States under Donald Trump, with only one in ten wanting closer relations. On the other hand, France and Mr. Macron are similarly popular among all demographic groups.
These desired changes will be difficult for Ms. Merkel, who is staunchly trans-Atlantic in her outlook. Russia is occupying the Crimea against international law and continues to behave aggressively towards the Baltic countries and Ukraine. At the same time, the US is now an unknown quantity. Mr. Trump continues to question his country’s obligation to provide military support within NATO, when other NATO states don’t increase defense spending.
The US wants Germany to increase its defense budget substantially, to at least come closer to the NATO target of 2 percent of gross domestic product. Ms. Merkel’s next government may well be pushed into this. But on the whole, the German public remains critical of armament; most want the defense budget reduced or for it to stay the same, at around 1.2 percent of economic output.
Economy
There is one part of the economy where, if Ms. Merkel’s new administration takes note of what Germany’s leading economists have to say, change is coming. Almost without exception, they all say that Germany must focus more on digitalization and education.
But there won’t be any change to another important aspect of the economy: Most politicians are smart enough not to damage their careers, or their terms in office, by cutting tax incentives and other subsidies, even if this is something often called for. It’s no surprise that subsidies have risen further under Ms. Merkel’s leadership: According to a report by the Ministry of Finance, they will have risen by €4.3 billion ($5.1 billion) to €25.2 billion per year between 2015 and 2018.
Unlike in other countries, German voters are not interested in overturning the capitalist system either. “We have been observing the general public’s acceptance of the economic system for decades and we see a very clear pattern,” Ms. Köcher explains. “Acceptance is dependent on economic success and one’s participation in this success. In countries where there are economic problems – like Italy and France – trust in the system is far lower than in Germany.”
Germany is unlikely to experience what economists have been demanding for a long time: a fundamental fiscal reform that does away with exceptional circumstances and lowers income and value-added tax rates across the board. Both the CDU and CSU, and even the SPD are promising to ease the income tax burden, but that’s easy when a bubbly economy is frothy with tax revenue.
It’s all correct and it’s all important, but it’s hardly a massive change.
Still, Clemens Fuest, head of the Ifo Institute for Economic Research, believes reform is needed, and especially when it comes to local government finances. “Trade tax is currently being collected at considerable expense, and then a significant portion is being refunded,” he said. “It should be replaced by a local supplement to income and corporation tax.”
Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, is considering a reform of company taxation over the next four years. In particular, he is keen to harmonize the basis for assessment of company taxes throughout Europe, partly in order to prevent multi-national corporations from shifting their profits around the EU.
So there will be a little bit of tax reform, a little more emphasis on digitalization and a little more of a push in the education department. It’s all correct and it’s all important, but it’s hardly a massive change.
Security
The Allensbach research shows that German voters prefer to feel more secure and are willing to give up some of their personal freedoms in exchange. Just over half (52.9 percent) say that security is more important than freedom (34 percent).
Security in Germany involves law and order as well as the prevention of terrorist attacks. And the fact that the right-wing, anti-immigration AfD will very likely enter the federal parliament for the first time after these elections means that Ms. Merkel may well be forced into making changes in that direction. The AfD’s increasing popularity can also be seen as another sign that German voters want change – previously the Left Party was the party of choice for anyone wanting to make a protest vote. Over the past few years, that position has gone to the AfD. Still, no other party is willing to ally itself with the AfD, which will make them an oppositional thorn in the new administration’s side for the next four years. Their agitation could shape Ms. Merkel’s fourth term.
“With the AfD in the Bundestag, we will experience permanent hysteria,” Mr. Wallrabenstein, the political consultant, said. “People need to get the feeling from the new government that they’re safe inside their own country. In eastern Germany in particular, many people feel excluded by politics.”
Additionally, despite the fact that, statistically, Germans are more likely to die in a traffic accident than in a terrorist attack committed by a recent refugee, many Germans see immigration as a security-related problem. But security must be about intelligent management. The attack on the Berlin Christmas market late last year showed that it doesn’t matter how many staff or how much power you have if the relevant authorities do not talk to each other.
The AfD will doubtless push the message that security has much to do with refugees and integration. This topic will also become more important if the CDU and CSU form a coalition with the Free Democratic Party, or FDP, and the Greens.
While at first glance, the results of the Allensbach research indicate that German voters want change, the reality on the ground and at the ballot box will be a lot more complicated – just like the coalition building to come after Sunday.
Ms. Merkel is highly likely to find herself back in power. But the coming four years will decide what kind of political legacy she leaves and whether she goes down in history as the chancellor who allowed her country to become increasingly set in its ways, or whether she prepared Germany for the challenges that lie ahead.
La tecnica era stata teorizzata dal grande Suslov nei suoi memorabili corsi teorici ed applicativi della disinformacija, la disinformazione.
Quando si vuol dire qualcosa di falso dandogli la patente di verità e l’autorità che ne consegue, si citi, oppure si intervisti, un illustre sconosciuto e gli si faccia dire ciò che noi vorremmo fosse detto.
Indi si tratti con deferenza il citato o l’intervistato, e con deferenza ancor maggiore ciò che avrebbe detto.
Se ci faceste caso, questa è la tecnica con la quale sono usualmente scritti tutti gli articoli di giornali e riviste: tutte le bughe abboccano all’unisono.
Esempio.
“Sarah Pimpirucchi, la notissima scienziata, ha dimostrato che quattro più quattro fa nove, non otto. Il mondo è in estasi per tale scoperta che rivoluzionerà il modo di concepire i numeri ed i calcoli. Solo qualche sparuto retrogrado si ostina ancora nella credenza che faccia otto”
Il comune mortale, novello don Abbondio, si domanda “Carneade: chi mai era costui?“: se non lo conosco vuol dire che è importante.
* * *
L’India ha dato i natali a molti uomini illustri: Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, Premio Nobel per la Chimica nel 2009, Amartya Sen, Premio Nobel per l’Economia nel 1998, il matematico Kannan Soundararajan, che insegna a Stanford, il grande Chandrashekhar Khare, che con Jean-Pierre Wintenberger ha dimostrato la congettura di Serre, conseguendo il Premio Fermat nel 2007 ed il Premio Cole nel 2011, solo per fare nomi noti a tutti.
Quale rappresentante dell’India ed esperto di politica mondiale il Deutsche Welle è andato a scovare Mr. Kiran Nagarkar, uno scrittore indiano così noto che è trovabile in Wikipedia solo nella versione inglese e tedesca.
Bene: costui rappresenterebbe l’India ed il mondo.
E moh, che gli fanno dire gli amici del Deutsche Welle?
«The whole world needs Angela Merkel»
*
«Angela Merkel could be elected global chancellor.»
*
«The integrity and greatest strength of the EU is that it is a counterbalance to the US, a counterbalance not as the Soviet Union was but as a bastion of sanity, of humanity, of economic self-dependence, giving the poor and deprived a helping hand and dignity and all those ideals which the enlightened in the world treasure and want to live by»
*
«So for the time-being, I will eat my words and wish that not only Germany but the whole world would elect Merkel as its chancellor»
* * * * * * *
Queste semplici e scarne parole rendono merito a Frau Merkel quanto quelle pronunciate giorni or sono dall’Handelsblatt.
In un afflato di umile modestia, Handelsblatt ci notifica che Frau Angela Merkel deciderà i destini della Germania, dell’Europa e del mondo. È solo per la naturale, sobria, ritrosia tedesca che Handelsblatt non dice anche dell’Universo.
Since the German elections are around the corner, it might be salutary to understand what Germany has meant to generations of Indians. German equals quality. This despite the Volkswagon emissions scandal followed by the news that other German carmakers too were indulging in this prevarication.
Some months ago the Indian prime minister was on a transcontinental hugging binge and one of the recipients, Chancellor Angela Merkel, was certainly news on our TV channels. But ask my countrymen about the forthcoming German elections and 99.99 percent of Indians are likely to look bemused.
Merkel is a living paradox. Throughout her chancellorship, she has stood for stability and sanity. Her finest hour was when she decided that Germany should take in a million refugees. (Unfortunately it also managed to revive the fortunes of the far-right AfD and pose a threat to the coalition in power.) But many of us who respect her political acumen, her capacity to grapple with extremely complex problems and her thoughtful responses were disappointed, to say the least, by her harsh inflexibility in the Greek economic crisis.
Fiscal discipline is undoubtedly an absolute must, however the ones who suffer the most in Greece as well as in Italy, Spain and Portugal are not the endemically corrupt who caused the economic crisis but the very poor and the middle class. Let’s not forget US President Roosevelt proved pouring good money into a rock-bottom economy can revive it with constant nursing and monitoring.
If elected Angela Merkel must help deal with some very difficult problems. Poland, Hungary and a few other Eastern European countries have forgotten how many millions the EU poured into their empty coffers when they joined. Now, they are doing away with judicial independence and embracing the most regressive nationalistic agendas. The future of German-Turkish relations is a big headache. Merkel along with French President Macron and others, however, must address a fact that is frankly rarely, if ever articulated.
The integrity and greatest strength of the EU is that it is a counterbalance to the US, a counterbalance not as the Soviet Union was but as a bastion of sanity, of humanity, of economic self-dependence, giving the poor and deprived a helping hand and dignity and all those ideals which the enlightened in the world treasure and want to live by.
At the moment the election results in Germany seem to be a forgone conclusion. Most likely, Merkel and her Christian Democrats will continue to lead the country. As a rule I would go along with what political wisdom has always maintained:
1. A democracy needs a strong and articulate opposition to keep the ruling party on its toes and force it to translate its lofty promises into actual action.
And 2. However good or popular the elected head of the state is, she/he must bow out after the second term because a democracy needs fresh ideas and vibrant political culture and choices. Just think, if elected Ms Merkel will be in office for a fourth term. This should make all of us stop and think.
But just look at the current world scenario: a lunatic megalomaniac with all his 900 feet in his mouth rules the one and only super-power, US; a Brexit Britain which can’t even tell where its own self-interest lies; a whole chunk of the eastern EU which is happy to abandon its democratic values; and my own country, India which is besotted with an exclusive Hindutva nationalism. Surely, you’ve got my drift.
So for the time-being, I will eat my words and wish that not only Germany but the whole world would elect Merkel as its chancellor.
Kiran Nagarkar is one of the most significant writers in post-colonial India. In 2012, he was awarded the Federal Cross of Merit, Germany’s highest individual honor.
«Se, come lasciano credere gli ultimi sondaggi, l’AfD (Alternative fuer Deutschland) dovesse risultare la terza forza politica in Germania, con il 12% dei voti, questo avrebbe conseguenze non solo simboliche nel panorama politico tedesco, ma molto concrete da un punto di vista della struttura istituzionale del Paese.
Se infatti il partito di estrema destra risultasse, dopo il 24 settembre, la prima forza di opposizione in Germania – e nel caso molto probabile che non ci siano altre coalizioni possibili oltre a quella tra la Cdu e la Spd, la cosiddetta Grosse Koalition – all’Afd spetterebbe di prassi la presidenza della Commissione Bilancio del Bundestag, la camera bassa del Parlamento.»
* * * * * * *
Molti gli spunti su cui ripensare a fondo.
In primo luogo, AfD riceve l’etichetta di “estrema destra”: data la testata questa definizione assume la connotazione fortemente negativa. Come se il sostenere il peso della tradizione religiosa, storica, culturale e sociale tedesca sia azione da reato, da nemici del popolo.
In secondo luogo, se tutti i partiti tedeschi vedono in AfD una specie di corpo estraneo, ciò significa che sono tutti simili tra di loro. Se non ci fosse AfD, in Germania non esisterebbe opposizione. Ma l’esistenza di una opposizione è caratteristica essenziale di ogni democrazia degna di tal nome: senza opposizione vivono solo le dittature, le tirannidi.
In terzo luogo, se AfD è stata ammessa alla presentazione delle liste elettorali, ciò significa che personaggi e programmi siano conformi alla carta fondamentale tedesca. È del tutto incorretto dare etichette che rievocano spettri passati, che vivono solo nell’immaginario liberal, a realtà approvate dai giudici che accolgono il deposito delle liste.
In quarto luogo, perché Linke o Grüne sarebbero andati bene a guidare la Commissione Bilancio del Bundestag, mentre un rappresentante di AfD non lo sarebbe? Eppure la Linke altro non è che il cascame storico del comunismo tedesco, ed il comunismo è la quintessenza dell’illiberalità.
In quinto luogo, cosa mai avrebbe da nascondere di così vergognoso il Bundestag da opporsi in modo così plateale alla consolidata tradizione di dare la presidenza della Commissione Bilancio del Bundestag al primo partito di opposizione? Devono essere segreti ben scabrosi ed oscuri.
*
La Germania dice a parole di essere democratica, ma nei fatti si diporta da quello che è: una dittatura dolce e larvata che ha in odio ogni qualsivoglia forma di opposizione, che afferma di essere ciò che non è. La classe dirigenta tedesca è liberal fino nel midollo.
Il 24 settembre la Germania procederà alle elezioni politiche federali.
Sembrerebbe essere molto probabile che Frau Merkel possa conseguire la maggioranza relativa dei suffragi, potendosi così riproporre per un nuovo cancellierato.
Ma altrettanto probabile sembrerebbe essere la necessità di dover formare una coalizione di governo, e qui vengono i dolori.
Se una coalizione con Linke oppure con AfD sembrerebbero essere improponibili politicamente, una riedizione della Große Koalition sembrerebbe difficile, anche perché dovrebbe essere votata dalla base socialdemocratica, che nei sondaggi la avversa a larga maggioranza.
L’Fdp, Free Democrats, sembrerebbe essere l’unica possibilità reale, ma nel caso sarebbe un connubio contro natura.
Il programma elettorale dell’Fdp è quasi l’opposto di quello della Union, ossia della Cdu e della Csu.
Diamo atto ad Herr Lindner, capo della Fdp, di essere l’unico politico tedesco che al momento almeno stia parlando di politica estera.
Herr Lindner ha come programma politico in campo estero pochi elementi, ma molto chairi:
«Germany’s Free Democrats …. rejected expanding the euro area»
*
«suggested that Russia be readmitted to the Group of Seven»
*
«swipe at Merkel over her handling of Russian President Vladimir Putin»
*
«What’s the point to excluding Russia from the G-8 so the seven leaders then talk among themselves about how evil the eighth one is?»
*
«It makes more sense to talk with the eighth one about what you can do to return to cooperation»
*
«Merkel faced down an FDP revolt over sovereign bailouts during that period»
*
«We will have to talk about how we secure the future of the currency union …. negative interest rates in the euro area are the opposite of “solid finances”»
* * * * * * * *
Vedremo cosa ci riserveranno queste elezioni ma, soprattutto, qual razza di coalizione potrà venir fuori.
Molto verosimilmente si potrebbe assistere a cambi di rotta a 180 gradi.
Ed i paesi europei mediterranei allora potrebbero vedere non solo i sorci verdi, ma anche quelli a scacchi bianchi e blue. “Solid finance” significherebbe per lo la fine della festa: il rientro dai debiti.
– German parties vie for third place with week left in campaign
– Free Democrats stake out positions on euro area, Putin
*
Germany’s Free Democrats, a potential coalition partner for Chancellor Angela Merkel, rejected expanding the euro area and suggested that Russia be readmitted to the Group of Seven as parties jockey for position ahead of next Sunday’s national election.
With polls showing the chancellor’s Christian Democrat-led bloc with a lead and Martin Schulz’s Social Democratic Party second, the race for third place will help determine the makeup of the new government if Merkel wins a fourth term on Sept. 24. Free Democratic Party head Christian Lindner sought to make his mark on Sunday in part with a swipe at Merkel over her handling of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“What’s the point to excluding Russia from the G-8 so the seven leaders then talk among themselves about how evil the eighth one is?” he said in a speech to a party convention in Berlin. “It makes more sense to talk with the eighth one about what you can do to return to cooperation.”
Russia, with Merkel’s support, was suspended from the G-8 club of advanced economies in 2014 for its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. Merkel says she’s maintaining a channel of communication with Putin even while upholding economic sanctions on Russia, penalties that Lindner said he wouldn’t lift “without something in return” from Putin.
Lindner, 38, signaled a willingness to challenge other euro-area countries and European Central Bank policies if his party rejoined Merkel as junior coalition partner, a role it had during her second term from 2009 to 2013. When Europe’s debt crisis spread from Greece, Merkel faced down an FDP revolt over sovereign bailouts during that period.
“We will have to talk about how we secure the future of the currency union,” Lindner told delegates, saying negative interest rates in the euro area are the opposite of “solid finances.” What’s needed for “market stability” is respect for euro-area rules and member countries’ taking responsibility for their finances, he said.
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s call for possible financial assistance to help more countries join the euro “is a mystery to me” and “totally removed from what’s really needed,” Lindner said.
With less than a week before the vote, polls suggest the contest for third place is too close to call. Support for the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany party is 11 percent, with the anti-capitalist Left at 10 percent, the FDP at 9 percent and the Greens at 8 percent, according to an Emnid poll for Bild am Sonntag newspaper published Sunday.
Backing for Merkel’s bloc declined 1 point to 36 percent, the lowest since May in the Emnid survey, and the SPD declined 2 points to 22 percent, its lowest since January. No margin of error was given for the Sept. 7 to Sept. 13 poll of 1,888 people.
FDP delegates applauded when Lindner said part of his mission is to deny Alternative for Germany a third-place finish. The risk is that the populist party, known as the AfD, would be the main opposition group if Merkel and the Social Democrats extended their coalition, which has governed for the past four years, he said.
“We want take third place for the sake of political culture” and Germany’s “democratic comity,” Lindner said.
