I should add that whilst David is right about war guilt in Germany I think this is entirely misplaced. For all that there may be a few old men and women left who were part of the Nazi regime, I don't believe that we should look at Germany today as any sort of reflection of that era. Germany today is not just another country but another world compared to 70 years ago and I don't hold a single German under the age of 80 or more as having any responsibility for what happened in the first half of the 20th century.
Yes we all have to learn from the mistakes of the past but Germany really does need to move on. The society created by Fredrick the Great died with the unconditional surrender in 1945.
I completely agree. In fact, I wrote a paragraph to much that effect, then cut it for length and as it had the potential to sidetrack, leaving just the nuanced line about 'sins of the grandfathers', implying that those responsible are regressing into the mists of time. To the extent that 'war criminals' are still being prosecuted, they're very old men being targeting for the crime of not having died yet when tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of others who acted exactly the same way have done. That's why they weren't prosecuted in the 1950s.
Still in denial, then. The liberal left, having first tried to ignore the massed sex attacks in Cologne (and in many other places across Europe), in the hope that the rest of us might not have noticed, are now attempting to explain it away. Prize for the most stupid contribution so far goes to the reliable Deborah Orr:
“how could anyone possibly imagine that among a million people from anywhere there wouldn’t be some proportion of nasty, sleazy misogynists? A British legal history that includes the withholding of all manner of basic rights from women suggests that there’s nothing racially or religiously inherent in chauvinism. People tend to believe what they’re taught to believe, and the unreliable evidence of what they see around them, until free thinkers and visionary leaders call them out on it.”
...Gaby admitted that she found it difficult, as a liberal, to talk about the attacks – but thought that we probably ought to do so, at some point. In other words, she (and the rest) didn’t want to talk about it because it directly contradicted one of their core beliefs.
Mr. Herdson, my understanding is that the position can be changed (maybe in a few years), it's not set until 2020.
Mr. Dodd, most people, across the political spectrum, praised Cameron for his migrant stance whilst lambasting Merkel, even as both positions were being made clear. It's not especially new, because the implications of both positions were obvious to almost everyone right away.
There is something in David Herdson's thesis, but I think he places the importance of Germany's cultural guilt at the wrong point in the process.
.....
So far from being bold, Angela Merkel's decision to accept the refugees was a recognition of practical inevitability. In my view, however, she made two mistakes which is where cultural guilt may have played a part. First, she did not make the amnesty a one-off for those already in Europe and coupling them with much fiercer measures to keep refugees from starting the journey. And secondly, the failure to put in place much more stringent screening and processing leads to peoples bringing their own cultural behaviour from warzones and highly sexist societies unfiltered onto the streets of Germany.
All correct of course, but she didn't have to encourage the flow of migrants - which she did - and has thereby sadly endangered more than would've been the case, nor did she have to cack handedly lean on her neighbours to take in large numbers of people that she had played a part in encouraging to travel. I dread to think what will unfold in the Spring as the weather improves.
Cameron got this one bang right.
To be fair to Mr Meeks his last paragraph pretty much says what you are suggesting.
This crisis was made worse by the over emoting over a poor dead baby on a beach. This baby had died on a Turkish beach I believe because a boat bound from safe Turkey to not much better Greece sank. This unleashes a wave of tolerance in media and public to permit encourage and sustain an exodus of refugees from the safety of Turkey. The most polite words I can use to describe this encouragement is 'foolish liberality'. As you say Cameron was right in his opinion and others should have listened to him. None of which makes the fathers of such babies 'rapists' or female molesters, nor the vast majority of what must be a million or more migrant refugees. The reasons why they should not be there are quite different.
I should add that whilst David is right about war guilt in Germany I think this is entirely misplaced. For all that there may be a few old men and women left who were part of the Nazi regime, I don't believe that we should look at Germany today as any sort of reflection of that era. Germany today is not just another country but another world compared to 70 years ago and I don't hold a single German under the age of 80 or more as having any responsibility for what happened in the first half of the 20th century.
Yes we all have to learn from the mistakes of the past but Germany really does need to move on. The society created by Fredrick the Great died with the unconditional surrender in 1945.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
I'm sure it's true that there was more to Merkel's decision than post-WWII shame. The question is why the whole political class acquiesced in it, from her own party to her coalition opponents to media and beyond. You can imagine what the reaction would have been had Cameron proposed an open door policy here.
Cameron's the one person in the EU with the right ideas about how to deal with Syrian refugees - resettle a few such as widows and orphans, or persecuted Christians, but put the bulk of the efforts into maintaining the camps in neighbouring countries from which the refugees can return to Syria at the end of the war.
If he had proposed Merkel's solution, he would have been lynched both by his own party and the press.
Absolutely right. Cameron has been spot on over the refugee crisis. He has resisted Merkel's knee jerk idiotic response and come up with a proposal that helps those in most need without leaving the country open to am unsustainable mass influx of refugees and (perhaps more importantly) without encouraging people to commit suicide in small boats on the Mediterranean. On this issue at least it was Cameron who deserved the plaudits not Merkel.
I have to agree, even though I have little time for Cameron, he called it perfectly. Though he would have known well that he would have been job hunting had he agreed to let in droves of immigrants under any circumstances. Just a pity he does not display his backbone very often.
''It's since emerged comparable things happened in Helsinki, Dusseldorf, and elsewhere.''
I would suggest the term 'behind the curve' was made for people like Mr Sox. Read the news, Europe is on fire.
Meanwhile a new poll has Trump beating Hillary by four points in a match up. That's BEATING Hillary. I read that on Breitbart. It's not a site I like, but hey, that's where the news is these days.
More bullshit from Merkel to-day,who knows perfectly well that there is no way that Syrian migrants convicted of crimes can be deported back to Syria & in any case Human Rights laws are massively stacked in favour of criminals making it virtually impossible to deport them.
There's going to be problems like were seen on New Year's Eve, until we start deporting people back to Syria.
These people know how "human rights" work in Europe and that they can behave as they wish without serious consequences. Until this attitude can be changed then the problems will continue. A few plane loads of their peers being shipped back to a war zone might start to focus their minds.
The EU is literally the only place in the world where foreign criminals are not taken from the court house or prison straight to the airport.
Good and thoughtful article David which has attracted some very good posts.
Germany is one of the few major European countries which didn't go in for colonizing the world and as a result have fewer ethnic minorities than most other EU countries.
One of the notable features of German cities is the absence of brown and black faces. There's a large Turkish population but they were invited in to feed the German economic powerhouse of the 60's and 70's and with a few blips have integrated well.
With an educated population and a more thoughtful press foreigners of whatever creed and colour are not as frightening to Germans as they are over here so when they saw the plight of the Syrian refugees their first thought was compassion not fear.
My feeling is that the panic and hysteria after Cologne will not be being felt over there as it is over here. They are much more pragmatic than we are and without our salacious press to stir things up the newcomers will assimilate reasonably quickly
Time to do some errands, but there is a tendency on here for Germanophobia, as part of a wider Europhobia. The Germans have certainly not handled the refugee/migrant issue perfectly (who has?), but the consequences of the collapse of much of the other side of the Med and middle East into a chaos of failed states in civil war was never going to be simple. There are no easy answers to that one.
Roger with his usual dollop of leftie nonsense..I bet there was some hysteria among the female victims..I don't think their first thought was that their attackers would soon integrate..they didn't know if they would be publicly gang raped or even killed..Roger You are a complete tosser.
Dr. Foxinsox, If hundreds of women in a UK city were subject to sexual assault, and a smaller number to rape, in a public place I'd expect it to be covered by TV news that day, and by print media the following day.
Imagine if, for example, a mainly white football crowd had one hundredth of what happened in Cologne.
Wall to wall coverage for five days in the Guardian and BBC , questions in the House of Commons, police task force and possible full public enquiry.
Time chooses the person who made the biggest impact. It's not an endorsement, more like a kiss of death.
Person of the Year (called Man of the Year until 1999[1]) is an annual issue of the United States news magazine Time that features and profiles a person, group, idea or object that "for better or for worse...has done the most to influence the events of the year".[2]
And secondly, the failure to put in place much more stringent screening and processing leads to peoples bringing their own cultural behaviour from warzones and highly sexist societies unfiltered onto the streets of Germany.
If you were to screen stringently for unacceptable cultural behaviour and sexist views you would be letting hardly any of these people in. I mean, really: only a fool would think that because someone crosses a border they lose their previous views or that giving them a little card saying "Treat women with respect" will make them understand how very differently we view women. And only a greater fool would think that by letting in numbers on the scale that Germany has done would make integration easier. Large numbers make the problem infinitely harder.
And, finally, the idea that Germany needed to decide whether or not to gratify or disappoint the migrants' desires really annoys me. It is not migrants' wishes which should be the or the only determinant here. "I want doesn't get."
Patrolling borders and making it hard for those you don't want to get to you is what any self-respecting state should do. But no, Merkel et al spent time criticising the UK and other countries who pointed out the obvious problems.
There is something in David Herdson's thesis, but I think he places the importance of Germany's cultural guilt at the wrong point in the process.
Looking back to last summer, the mass movement of migrants started long before Angela Merkel threw open Germany's borders. In the spring we had seen the boat journeys to Africa. We had seen chaos in Greece. We had seen the confrontations with the authorities in Hungary. When it came in late August, Angela Merkel's decision came as a shock in the midst of a crisis that had been long developing. It was not a sudden decision, nor was it early. Why did she do it?
First, and most importantly, the migrants were largely aiming to go to Germany. There are a few other countries that would have been acceptable to them but Germany was the top prize. So Germany had to decide whether to accept or disappoint them.
.......... So far from being bold, Angela Merkel's decision to accept the refugees was a recognition of practical inevitability. In my view, however, she made two mistakes which is where cultural guilt may have played a part. First, she did not make the amnesty a one-off for those already in Europe and coupling them with much fiercer measures to keep refugees from starting the journey. And secondly, the failure to put in place much more stringent screening and processing leads to peoples bringing their own cultural behaviour from warzones and highly sexist societies unfiltered onto the streets of Germany.
All correct of course, but she didn't have to encourage the flow of migrants - which she did - and has thereby sadly endangered more than would've been the case, nor did she have to cack handedly lean on her neighbours to take in large numbers of people that she had played a part in encouraging to travel. I dread to think what will unfold in the Spring as the weather improves.
Cameron got this one bang right.
For all of Cameron's faults, Mrs Merkel is a far worse Leader. Unable to show real Leadership on the Greek problem, unable to think through the consequences of the first refugees across the med a few years ago and then the "all welcome" statement. A feeble minded Leader unable to think through the consequences. She seems to have built her career on compromise rather than Leadership, a Harold Wilson type of Leader that pushes problems under the carpet.
What Merkel has done will impact Britain as soon as all these asylum seekers/refugees get their papers and become like any other EU citizens, free to come to work and claim housing, in work or out of work benefits from day one.
The British economy unlike the German one is increasingly reliant on cheap, "flexible" (meaning non-unionised, compliant, migrant) labour working in low skilled, low paid, low productive jobs. Osborne's so called "jobs miracle", has overwhelmingly created zero hours contracts, low paying, low skilled jobs in which the worker can only live by claiming in work tax credits and housing benefit as a minimum.
As soon as these migrants, most of whom speak English, realise how hard German is to learn, find it difficult getting jobs and hear through the grape vine the easy availability of welfare benefits in Britain compared to the rest of Europe, they will head here and they will be perfectly entitled too.
About 10 years ago the Dutch gave a large number of Somali's residency and they suddenly came to Britain en masse. No wonder Cameron wants the EU referendum ASAP. In late 2016 and especially 2017 expect the immigration figures to show huge amounts of "Germans" suddenly migrating to the UK.
I should add that whilst David is right about war guilt in Germany I think this is entirely misplaced. For all that there may be a few old men and women left who were part of the Nazi regime, I don't believe that we should look at Germany today as any sort of reflection of that era. Germany today is not just another country but another world compared to 70 years ago and I don't hold a single German under the age of 80 or more as having any responsibility for what happened in the first half of the 20th century.
Yes we all have to learn from the mistakes of the past but Germany really does need to move on. The society created by Fredrick the Great died with the unconditional surrender in 1945.
I completely agree. In fact, I wrote a paragraph to much that effect, then cut it for length and as it had the potential to sidetrack, leaving just the nuanced line about 'sins of the grandfathers', implying that those responsible are regressing into the mists of time. To the extent that 'war criminals' are still being prosecuted, they're very old men being targeting for the crime of not having died yet when tens (perhaps hundreds) of thousands of others who acted exactly the same way have done. That's why they weren't prosecuted in the 1950s.
I think there is also an element of shame (heavily promoted by the left) of the more recent treatment of immigrants. For example the Turkish - it is not possible to give up Turkish citizenship and for a long time Germany banned dual nationality.. so for a long time there was a minority within Germany that wanted to participate in society, but was effectively barred.
So the "impermissible" thing has a bedrock of WWII guilt with a more recent topping of guilt over treatment of previous emigration waves.
To be honest, it is more that Germany is in a similar social state to late 90s/early 2000s - I remember for example that, in reaction to allegations of persecution, the police were (effectively) withdrawn from policing "traveler" encampments in the UK. A policy that was only reversed quite recently.
It should be noted the biggest victim of that was, of course the travelers/gypsies. The encampments were taken over by the very worst from within their own communities who preyed on their own as a start.
The former Labour frontbencher Dan Jarvis has indicated he may not stand for the party at the next general election if Jeremy Corbyn succeeds in changing policy to oppose the renewal of the Trident nuclear weapons programme.
This is exactly what I have been talking about. There is a reason why Corbyn is going so hard on Trident and this is it. Jarvis will not be alone.
As I said yesterday, the removal of Eagle from the defence portfolio was the big story in the Labour reshuffle and the only one that mattered.
I agree with you. And I said at the time that the moving of some CDN nutjob to defence would tell us all we need to know about Corbyn. It looks possible (but I would have to say far from certain - but possible) that an anti nuclear policy would have a similar effect to a deselection policy for the Corbynites. Jervis could still stand as an indepenent. I wonder how many 'independent' Labour candidates there will e in 2020?
'Deportation of criminals - provided it is actually done - is one answer. Drastically curbing immigration another. And rewriting the refugee conventions to reflect the world as it us now and what the people of Europe feel about immigration - and not just what the liberal elites think we should feel - is a third.
I'm not holding my breath.'
More bullshit from Merkel to-day,who knows perfectly well that there is no way that Syrian migrants convicted of crimes can be deported back to Syria & in any case Human Rights laws are massively stacked in favour of criminals making it virtually impossible to deport them.
I should add that whilst David is right about war guilt in Germany I think this is entirely misplaced. For all that there may be a few old men and women left who were part of the Nazi regime, I don't believe that we should look at Germany today as any sort of reflection of that era. Germany today is not just another country but another world compared to 70 years ago and I don't hold a single German under the age of 80 or more as having any responsibility for what happened in the first half of the 20th century.
Yes we all have to learn from the mistakes of the past but Germany really does need to move on. The society created by Fredrick the Great died with the unconditional surrender in 1945.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
True but it was undoubtedly his militarisation of society that set the stage for the German behaviour of the next 2 centuries. He may not have agreed with the Nazi philosophy but he gave them the tools to impose it on Europe.
........... For all its horrors, no-one died in Cologne. .........
So that's all right then?
Of course not, and I never suggested it was.
Just that the police have a difficult situation in attacking a mob of revellers in which some criminals are active, even when prepared as at Notting Hill carnival.
An innappropriate respnse such as water cannon could easily led to the deaths of innocent revellers.
Off topic, just read an interesting anti-Khan piece by Karren Brady in the Sun.
Enlisting women to fight Khan is quite smart move in my book. It reminds voters of the 'different cultural approach' to women of many Khan's lovely associates.
Interesting article as always, and good luck with the job-hunt. I also think that Merkel's policy has been erratic, but I read the German press frequently so I'll put the side for balance.
Germany has on the whole a good experience of immigration - successive waves of Vietnamese, Turks and others (including Brits, for a while - remember Auf Wiedersehen Pet?) have been fairly seamlessly accommodated. The single case of hostility to what was seen as an ethnic group stands out in German minds as an epic national disaster. So the "foreign culture risks swamping us" line of thought which resonates in Hungary and Slovakia has limited appeal. Germany is very confident about the resilience of its national identity and its economic success - though the Eastern states rather less so, which is arguably one reason why the far right has made more progress there.
The political culture is relentlessly sober and rational: if it's felt that there is a need for more young workers (as there is), German politicians and most media eye with contempt anyone who shouts slogans - that's why Pegida hasn't spread far beyond its beginnings in a couple of eastern cities. And they're suspicious of the way that both domestic and foreign press seize on any evidence of problems. The initial reports suggested that there was an epidemic of violence in numerous German cities. There wasn't - there was a very serious problem in Cologne, and a few drunken scuffles elsewhere.
That said, nobody sane can take with equanimity a decision by 1000 people to invade a celebration and cause havoc, with crimes from rape and intimidation to organised theft. And it's prompted a "Hang on a minute, there's a real issue here" reaction in the press and the middle ranks of the governing CDU. Merkel needs to be seen to be cracking down on organised foreign criminality. But that hasn't really broken through to an overwhelming demand for a sea change in immigration policy. The reaction is more like after the youth riots in Britain - people want to see the authorities cracking down hard.
So do expect Merkel to sound tough in the coming days, but don't expect political Armageddon there. German politics and indeed German voters are too wedded to what they see as a rather successful status quo.
And FWIW I don't think Marine Le Pen has any realistic chance - I'd put her at around 20-1. Identity politics in France is very strong, and she's on the wrong side of it - a majority simply don't want to see an FN president.
Germany is still receiving 3,500 migrants PER DAY - that is over 100k a month.
Several hundred million more to come. The wars of North Africa and the Middle East will be imported with them. Germany really knows how to mess Europe up.
''And FWIW I don't think Marine Le Pen has any realistic chance - I'd put her at around 20-1. Identity politics in France is very strong, and she's on the wrong side of it - a majority simply don't want to see an FN president.''
You are probably correct, but I believe the situation is much more fluid than many believe, or at least would like to believe.
As I say the real anger isn't with immigrants. It is with people in power who have allowed this situation to come about, and whose response to these problems is 'whatever'.
What Merkel has done will impact Britain as soon as all these asylum seekers/refugees get their papers and become like any other EU citizens, free to come to work and claim housing, in work or out of work benefits from day one.
The British economy unlike the German one is increasingly reliant on cheap, "flexible" (meaning non-unionised, compliant, migrant) labour working in low skilled, low paid, low productive jobs. Osborne's so called "jobs miracle", has overwhelmingly created zero hours contracts, low paying, low skilled jobs in which the worker can only live by claiming in work tax credits and housing benefit as a minimum.
As soon as these migrants, most of whom speak English, realise how hard German is to learn, find it difficult getting jobs and hear through the grape vine the easy availability of welfare benefits in Britain compared to the rest of Europe, they will head here and they will be perfectly entitled too.
About 10 years ago the Dutch gave a large number of Somali's residency and they suddenly came to Britain en masse. No wonder Cameron wants the EU referendum ASAP. In late 2016 and especially 2017 expect the immigration figures to show huge amounts of "Germans" suddenly migrating to the UK.
My understanding is they cannot be German citizens, even if they were to be granted as such, and travel as such for 8 (??) years
My understanding of this mass of Somalis coming to the UK via Holland is that it numbered 20,000 over 5 years. My further understanding is that we the UK were the biggest destination for Somali asylum seekers then Holland second before this. Current figures for Somalis in Holland are about (as far as I can see) between 20 and 25 thousand. Some official figures would be nice to know rather than your wild speculations.
Mr. Palmer, she invited in (by current estimates) more than half of the accused.
And, given the media ignored mass molestation and a smaller number of alleged rapes, what else have they ignored?
The victims were abused by hundreds, were failed by the police, ignored initially by the media and then had their ordeal declared by Ralf Jaeger as being, at most, as bad as someone being a rightwing cretin on the internet.
The status quo has changed in Germany. More than 1% of the population was invited there this year by Merkel's idiotic siren call.
It ought to be a pretty sobering thought for the hysteric PB commentariat that it takes NPXMP to shed some light (common sense heaven forbid even) onto an issue.
Köln is (was?) a great place to visit; the Cathedral, the Eau de Cologne area, all the different beers, and most important of all: the chocolate museum.
Time to do some errands, but there is a tendency on here for Germanophobia, as part of a wider Europhobia.
I wouldn't say there was Germanophobia. Rather a lot of sympathy, some of it possibly misconceived. Some comments (including my own) might suggest that we know the solution to the Germans' problems better than they do, which is silly. I think everyone wishes them the very best though.
Very good, insightful piece. I'd argue, though, that on top of the weight of history there was a level of pragmatism about Merkel's decision - Germany has an ageing population that will need to be supported by a younger one. Birth rates are relatively low. Merkel not only saw a moral imperative, but a practical opportunity. She clearly did not think it through. But the fact that even now it has had little effect on her standing or the position of the parties surely indicates a lot of Germans, however reluctantly, essentially went along with the call she made. Maybe the recent events will change that, we shall see.
But David is right, Germany is different. Every country is. A narrative of rich, liberal elites imposing their views on everyone else may be satisfying, but it does not come close to telling the full story.
The question I don't understand is this: the demographic pressures on Germany have been known for some time. There were lots of Eastern European states with young populations wanting to make better lives for themselves. If the Germans wanted to atone for war guilt, these countries were exactly the right recipients. And yet the Germans kept them out and then let in a load of people from countries with whom they have no historical or cultural link and with well known and long standing problems.
It is an appalling mistake. One from which women in Germany and elsewhere are suffering, one which is causing problems for Jewish communities and which will cause issues for all of us.
Deportation of criminals - provided it is actually done - is one answer. Drastically curbing immigration another. And rewriting the refugee conventions to reflect the world as it us now and what the people of Europe feel about immigration - and not just what the liberal elites think we should feel - is a third.
I'm not holding my breath.
How did Germany keep out all the Eastern Europe EU citizens, it is after all a champion of free movement. Tell us how many were turned away at the border.
Germany kept out the Eastern Europeans by putting 10 year transitional controls on them, along with every other EU country apart from the UK, Sweden and Ireland. It meant that Polish, Lithuanians, Latvians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Slovakians etc etc could not work or claim any type of welfare in Germany until the transitional controls had come to an end.
Interesting article as always, and good luck with the job-hunt. I also think that Merkel's policy has been erratic, but I read the German press frequently so I'll put the side for balance.
Germany has on the whole a good experience of immigration - successive waves of Vietnamese, Turks and others (including Brits, for a while - remember Auf Wiedersehen Pet?) have been fairly seamlessly accommodated. The single case of hostility to what was seen as an ethnic group stands out in German minds as an epic national disaster. So the "foreign culture risks swamping us" line of thought which resonates in Hungary and Slovakia has limited appeal. Germany is very confident about the resilience of its national identity and its economic success - though the Eastern states rather less so, which is arguably one reason why the far right has made more progress there.
The political culture is relentlessly sober and rational: if it's felt that there is a need for more young workers (as there is), German politicians and most media eye with contempt anyone who shouts slogans - that's why Pegida hasn't spread far beyond its beginnings in a couple of eastern cities. And they're suspicious of the way that both domestic and foreign press seize on any evidence of problems. The initial reports suggested that there was an epidemic of violence in numerous German cities. There wasn't - there was a very serious problem in Cologne, and a few drunken scuffles elsewhere.
That said, nobody sane can take with equanimity a decision by 1000 people to invade a celebration and cause havoc, with crimes from rape and intimidation to organised theft. And it's prompted a "Hang on a minute, there's a real issue here" reaction in the press and the middle ranks of the governing CDU. Merkel needs to be seen to be cracking down on organised foreign criminality. But that hasn't really broken through to an overwhelming demand for a sea change in immigration policy. The reaction is more like after the youth riots in Britain - people want to see the authorities cracking down hard.
So do expect Merkel to sound tough in the coming days, but don't expect political Armageddon there. German politics and indeed German voters are too wedded to what they see as a rather successful status quo.
I am nowhere near as familiar with Germany as you are, Nick, but I travel there a fair bit and do a lot of work with Germans and your impressions ring very true. But my experiences (and maybe yours?) are with the more affluent and educated section of society there, so maybe things are seen and felt differently among other parts of the population - especially the further east and south you go? That said, I can't see recent events having any major impact on perceptions of Merkel or voting intentions. Germany is very stable politically.
''It ought to be a pretty sobering thought for the hysteric PB commentariat that it takes NPXMP to shed some light (common sense heaven forbid even) onto an issue.''
While I appreciate mr meeks' take in trying to understand merkel's decision as plausibly rational, if one accepts certain positions in the context as she saw them as true, her call still beggars belief. It's notable that even many who feel Britain could accept more refugees, a lot more, and I'm one who thinks that, felt it was an absurd decision. Too blunt, too massive in impact. For a supposedly very savvy woman who has been a leader a long time, it seems crazy she could not see that, that she made the mistakes mr Meeks talks about. So I feel mr herdsons take makes sense as bridging the gap from how a rational and intelligent person could come to that view but do it so poorly.
And yet the decision was celebrated and will continue to be. Some do feel that being careful with refugees because done will be nasty characters is tantamount to labelling all refugees as nasty who don't denser with help, and a blanket call to come one all is appealing in its niceness by comparison.
I should add that whilst David is right about war guilt in Germany I think this is entirely misplaced. For all that there may be a few old men and women left who were part of the Nazi regime, I don't believe that we should look at Germany today as any sort of reflection of that era. Germany today is not just another country but another world compared to 70 years ago and I don't hold a single German under the age of 80 or more as having any responsibility for what happened in the first half of the 20th century.
Yes we all have to learn from the mistakes of the past but Germany really does need to move on. The society created by Fredrick the Great died with the unconditional surrender in 1945.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
True but it was undoubtedly his militarisation of society that set the stage for the German behaviour of the next 2 centuries. He may not have agreed with the Nazi philosophy but he gave them the tools to impose it on Europe.
There was a real decline from Count Yorck demanding " noble, humane conduct, even towards the enemy" in 1813 (in line with Frederick's philosophy) to the barbarism of later generations.
Mr. Palmer, she invited in (by current estimates) more than half of the accused.
And, given the media ignored mass molestation and a smaller number of alleged rapes, what else have they ignored?
The victims were abused by hundreds, were failed by the police, ignored initially by the media and then had their ordeal declared by Ralf Jaeger as being, at most, as bad as someone being a rightwing cretin on the internet.
The status quo has changed in Germany. More than 1% of the population was invited there this year by Merkel's idiotic siren call.
The other side of the argument is that its 50-500 people out of probably 1million who have arrived this year.... That is a very small percentage....
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
........... For all its horrors, no-one died in Cologne. .........
So that's all right then?
Of course not, and I never suggested it was.
Just that the police have a difficult situation in attacking a mob of revellers in which some criminals are active, even when prepared as at Notting Hill carnival.
An innappropriate respnse such as water cannon could easily led to the deaths of innocent revellers.
My own opinion is that you are wasting your breath. Some people are determined to misrepresent what actually happened to perpetuate their own agenda. There are a host of nasty nutjob websites out there doing just that. Of course you never suggested 'it was all right' but such nutjobs do not want top listen to your argument. The events in Cologne were disgraceful and shocking, but in being critical we should be critical of what took place not what was pretended to have taken place.
Merkel is right about the need for changes to the refugee convention and HR law re deportation.
Words are wind. Actual legislative change is required.
With Merkel advocating it, and no doubt many other European leaders, then there has never been a better time for a renegotiation of the convention on refugees and the HR conventions.
I wouldn't trust Merkel's judgment on any renegotiation of it, frankly, given the appalling judgment she has shown on this issue so far.
But you're right that the timing is right - long overdue, in fact.
Interesting article as always, and good luck with the job-hunt. I also think that Merkel's policy has been erratic, but I read the German press frequently so I'll put the side for balance.
Germany has on the whole a good experience of immigration - successive waves of Vietnamese, Turks and others (including Brits, for a while - remember Auf Wiedersehen Pet?) have been fairly seamlessly accommodated. The single case of hostility to what was seen as an ethnic group stands out in German minds as an epic national disaster. So the "foreign culture risks swamping us" line of thought which resonates in Hungary and Slovakia has limited appeal. Germany is very confident about the resilience of its national identity and its economic success - though the Eastern states rather less so, which is arguably one reason why the far right has made more progress there.
The political culture is relentlessly sober and rational: if it's felt that there is a need for more young workers (as there is), German politicians and most media eye with contempt anyone who shouts slogans - that's why Pegida hasn't spread far beyond its beginnings in a couple of eastern cities. And they're suspicious of the way that both domestic and foreign press seize on any evidence of problems. The initial reports suggested that there was an epidemic of violence in numerous German cities. There wasn't - there was a very serious problem in Cologne, and a few drunken scuffles elsewhere.
That said, nobody sane can take with equanimity a decision by 1000 people to invade a celebration and cause havoc, with crimes from rape and intimidation to organised theft. And it's prompted a "Hang on a minute, there's a real issue here" reaction in the press and the middle ranks of the governing CDU. Merkel needs to be seen to be cracking down on organised foreign criminality. But that hasn't really broken through to an overwhelming demand for a sea change in immigration policy. The reaction is more like after the youth riots in Britain - people want to see the authorities cracking down hard.
So do expect Merkel to sound tough in the coming days, but don't expect political Armageddon there. German politics and indeed German voters are too wedded to what they see as a rather successful status quo.
And FWIW I don't think Marine Le Pen has any realistic chance - I'd put her at around 20-1. Identity politics in France is very strong, and she's on the wrong side of it - a majority simply don't want to see an FN president.
Very good post. There is an inherent stability sbout Germany that I expect to confound predictions of political upheaval (of which there is so far little sign).
That said, what do you make of David's speculation, in an earlier comment, that the SPD could do a Pasok?
''And yet the decision was celebrated and will continue to be. Some do feel that being careful with refugees because done will be nasty characters is tantamount to labelling all refugees as nasty who don't denser with help, and a blanket call to come one all is appealing in its niceness by comparison.''
''I have read numerous pieces of criticism of Cologne, and not once has any commentator come close, or even close to close, to labelling all refugees. ''
People aren't angry with refugees. They are angry with their own authorities.
I agree with you. And I said at the time that the moving of some CDN nutjob to defence would tell us all we need to know about Corbyn. It looks possible (but I would have to say far from certain - but possible) that an anti nuclear policy would have a similar effect to a deselection policy for the Corbynites. Jervis could still stand as an indepenent. I wonder how many 'independent' Labour candidates there will e in 2020?
With the unions backing Trident, the perfect storm would be CND/STW/Labour candidates standing against UNITE/Trident/Labour candidates and splitting the vote
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
Mr. Eek, that's a flawed comparison, because we don't know how well, or badly, the others are integrating. There have been many reports on Twitter [which could, therefore, be utter tosh, or completely right] of covered up sexual assaults which were often against charity workers assisting, or trying to, the migrants.
The fact the media ignored what happened on such a large scale event, which was bound to come out simply due to the sheer number of victims and witnesses, and then some in the political class downplayed over a hundred alleged groping instances and two alleged rapes, does not engender confidence that we have a clear picture of the situation.
Rotherham was covered up for years, and other comparable disgraces have happened elsewhere. Downthread there's a reference to a German show, sounds like the equivalent of Crimewatch, not showing a crime because the suspect had dark skin and they didn't want to inflame tensions.
The former Labour frontbencher Dan Jarvis has indicated he may not stand for the party at the next general election if Jeremy Corbyn succeeds in changing policy to oppose the renewal of the Trident nuclear weapons programme.
This is exactly what I have been talking about. There is a reason why Corbyn is going so hard on Trident and this is it. Jarvis will not be alone.
As I said yesterday, the removal of Eagle from the defence portfolio was the big story in the Labour reshuffle and the only one that mattered.
I agree with you. And I said at the time that the moving of some CDN nutjob to defence would tell us all we need to know about Corbyn. It looks possible (but I would have to say far from certain - but possible) that an anti nuclear policy would have a similar effect to a deselection policy for the Corbynites. Jervis could still stand as an indepenent. I wonder how many 'independent' Labour candidates there will e in 2020?
The Jarvis interview is interesting and the sort of centrist balance that I think Labour does need - it's balanced and honest, disagreeing with Corbyn without making sly digs at him. On a point of detail I agree with him that modern Westminster politics makes plotting much harder because there is far less spontaneous socialising in the bars - go into Strangers on a random evening and you'll find maybe 10-20 MPs (out of 650) with their guests (there will be more on the Terrace in good weather, but you can't sensibly plot over the small Terrace tables). If you want to plot you actually need to organise a meeting about it, which is significantly harder to do from cold than if you've had a series of "We can't go on like this" evening natters.
But to respond to Flightpath, I can't see many "Independent Labour" candidates, for the same reason as I can't see an SDP Mk 2 - the probability of simply splitting the vote in half is too strong. Older MPs who aren't happy will tend to simply call it a day. Younger ones will wait for a more propitious tide.
Good luck with the job hunt. ''analysis, comment, opinion, political strategy'' - Jeremy Corbyn is badly in need of some of that. Would you like me to put in a good word for you??
Time to do some errands, but there is a tendency on here for Germanophobia, as part of a wider Europhobia.
I wouldn't say there was Germanophobia. Rather a lot of sympathy, some of it possibly misconceived. Some comments (including my own) might suggest that we know the solution to the Germans' problems better than they do, which is silly. I think everyone wishes them the very best though.
I wouldn't bother trying to respond to Foxinsox's smears Wanderer. He has a record of taking reasonable concerns and measured criticism and casting it as extremism or xenophobia.
Very good, insightful piece. I'd argue, though, that on top of the weight of history there was a level of pragmatism about Merkel's decision - Germany has an ageing population that will need to be supported by a younger one. Birth rates are relatively low. Merkel not only saw a moral imperative, but a practical opportunity. She clearly did not think it through. But the fact that even now it has had little effect on her standing or the position of the parties surely indicates a lot of Germans, however reluctantly, essentially went along with the call she made. Maybe the recent events will change that, we shall see.
But David is right, Germany is different. Every country is. A narrative of rich, liberal elites imposing their views on everyone else may be satisfying, but it does not come close to telling the full story.
At the start there certainly was backing for Merkels stance but you can't argue that it was due to economic practicalities about an ageing workforce. After all, the typical leftie supporter clapping Merkel, usually shows no interest in govt finances, govt debt etc.
Secondly, not all the muslim invaders are engineers and doctors, very few are. Most, apparently have an IQ of about 85. They will find it extremely difficult to find work in an advanced industrial economy as well educated as Germany is.
What I find really interesting is how the elite can no longer control the narrative. The media only started talking about Cologne etc after it was all over the net. The same is happening with Trump in america.
The former Labour frontbencher Dan Jarvis has indicated he may not stand for the party at the next general election if Jeremy Corbyn succeeds in changing policy to oppose the renewal of the Trident nuclear weapons programme.
This is exactly what I have been talking about. There is a reason why Corbyn is going so hard on Trident and this is it. Jarvis will not be alone.
As I said yesterday, the removal of Eagle from the defence portfolio was the big story in the Labour reshuffle and the only one that mattered.
I agree with you. And I said at the time that the moving of some CDN nutjob to defence would tell us all we need to know about Corbyn. It looks possible (but I would have to say far from certain - but possible) that an anti nuclear policy would have a similar effect to a deselection policy for the Corbynites. Jervis could still stand as an indepenent. I wonder how many 'independent' Labour candidates there will e in 2020?
The Jarvis interview is interesting and the sort of centrist balance that I think Labour does need - it's balanced and honest, disagreeing with Corbyn without making sly digs at him. On a point of detail I agree with him that modern Westminster politics makes plotting much harder because there is far less spontaneous socialising in the bars - go into Strangers on a random evening and you'll find maybe 10-20 MPs (out of 650) with their guests (there will be more on the Terrace in good weather, but you can't sensibly plot over the small Terrace tables). If you want to plot you actually need to organise a meeting about it, which is significantly harder to do from cold than if you've had a series of "We can't go on like this" evening natters.
But to respond to Flightpath, I can't see many "Independent Labour" candidates, for the same reason as I can't see an SDP Mk 2 - the probability of simply splitting the vote in half is too strong. Older MPs who aren't happy will tend to simply call it a day. Younger ones will wait for a more propitious tide.
The real anger about Cologne is gradually coming out - it's the suspicion that the Authorities acted differently because of the race/ethnic element. Of course, in a million refugees. you'll have criminals, and given the culture of the countries they're coming from, a misogynist bent.
But as have been mentioned, if a thousand footballer supporters went on a rape/assault/ robbing spree, no one would be defending them or making any excuses, and the Authorities would have acted differently.
And we are getting the expected response from the more left-leaning sources ...
(1) It didn't happen, so ignore it. (2) It may have happened, but it was minor. (3 )OK, it was major but the most important thing is to stop a racist reaction. (4) Ooops! Talk about it as being due to males the wold over (copyright - The Guardian), or robbery, or something that could happen any time.
Rotherham was the template, but they've followed the script nicely so far.
''I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.''
The best defence against fascism is sensible and unemotional government.
Hitler was created by France's absurd reparations demands after WW1. They completely undermined those sensible Germans trying to steer the country in the 1920s.
Good luck with the job hunt. ''analysis, comment, opinion, political strategy'' - Jeremy Corbyn is badly in need of some of that. Would you like me to put in a good word for you??
Very good, insightful piece. I'd argue, though, that on top of the weight of history there was a level of pragmatism about Merkel's decision - Germany has an ageing population that will need to be supported by a younger one. Birth rates are relatively low. Merkel not only saw a moral imperative, but a practical opportunity. She clearly did not think it through. But the fact that even now it has had little effect on her standing or the position of the parties surely indicates a lot of Germans, however reluctantly, essentially went along with the call she made. Maybe the recent events will change that, we shall see.
But David is right, Germany is different. Every country is. A narrative of rich, liberal elites imposing their views on everyone else may be satisfying, but it does not come close to telling the full story.
At the start there certainly was backing for Merkels stance but you can't argue that it was due to economic practicalities about an ageing workforce. After all, the typical leftie supporter clapping Merkel, usually shows no interest in govt finances, govt debt etc.
Secondly, not all the muslim invaders are engineers and doctors, very few are. Most, apparently have an IQ of about 85. They will find it extremely difficult to find work in an advanced industrial economy as well educated as Germany is.
What I find really interesting is how the elite can no longer control the narrative. The media only started talking about Cologne etc after it was all over the net. The same is happening with Trump in america.
I fear this is not going to end well.
The whole point is that in Germany it was not a left/right issue. Merkel is not a leftie.
For all of Cameron's faults, Mrs Merkel is a far worse Leader. Unable to show real Leadership on the Greek problem, unable to think through the consequences of the first refugees across the med a few years ago and then the "all welcome" statement. A feeble minded Leader unable to think through the consequences. She seems to have built her career on compromise rather than Leadership, a Harold Wilson type of Leader that pushes problems under the carpet.
Instinctual compromise is not necessarily a poor quality for a leader to have, and from descriptions of German society and politics from those who know the country far better than me, it sounds like the a good way of delivering outcomes and even, though effective negotiation and compromise, defeating one's opponents, as contradictory as that might seem (depending on how much you both compromise on and who ends up benefiting most in the end). So her very longevity and, even if the success of a nation cannot entirely be put at the door of one person, lack of ruining the place after so long in charge, I think speaks to her quite well as a leader in all probability.
That being said, I think her problem may just be the very familiar progression of one's faults and strengths through years of being in charge, to the point they become problematic. (Flanderization is a term I often think about with the trend, which is the process of TV characters having a major defining trait which exaggerates over time until it becomes their entire character, outlandish and problematic). Merkel's been in charge a long time, and looks set to be for a fair time to come as well, and she has an instinctive method of leadership which has served her well. But how adaptable is she? How much could she break from that mold she has set for herself if she had to? Her actions over Greece came across as that of a ditherer rather than someone who is merely cautious, incapable of deciding something because putting such things off for another time had always worked before. Like a cricketer strong in a particular stroke, she can overuse her tactics and even get out/make a flawed decision with what is usually a strength.
''The real anger about Cologne is gradually coming out - it's the suspicion that the Authorities acted differently because of the race/ethnic element.''
It's worse than that. It's the suspicion that the Authorities will sacrifice anything and anybody on the altar of their own morality. Including the people who have entrusted the authorities with authority.
The notion that the elected are meant to represent the people who elect them is completely alien to many modern politicians, and that is the real issue here.
Mr. Eek, that's a flawed comparison, because we don't know how well, or badly, the others are integrating. There have been many reports on Twitter [which could, therefore, be utter tosh, or completely right] of covered up sexual assaults which were often against charity workers assisting, or trying to, the migrants.
The fact the media ignored what happened on such a large scale event, which was bound to come out simply due to the sheer number of victims and witnesses, and then some in the political class downplayed over a hundred alleged groping instances and two alleged rapes, does not engender confidence that we have a clear picture of the situation.
Rotherham was covered up for years, and other comparable disgraces have happened elsewhere. Downthread there's a reference to a German show, sounds like the equivalent of Crimewatch, not showing a crime because the suspect had dark skin and they didn't want to inflame tensions.
It is also worth noting that there have been reports for some time of sexual attacks within migrant camps against the relatively few women refugees. That should have been a warning and a clue. It was ignored.
@NickPalmer knows Germany better than me and he may be right that Germany has had a good experience of immigration. But that is in part because it has not had that much immigration by comparison with other countries. And there have been issues with the Turkish guest workers - in part in how they were treated by the Germans.
But that is rather a naive view. Within a few months of a massive amount of immigration, we are already getting reports of serious problems and German politicians are beginning to talk about reversing their previous policy. That does not seem to me to be evidence of sober policy-making. It smells of panic and a realisation that they may have bitten off more than they can chew.
I'm sure it's true that there was more to Merkel's decision than post-WWII shame. The question is why the whole political class acquiesced in it, from her own party to her coalition opponents to media and beyond. You can imagine what the reaction would have been had Cameron proposed an open door policy here.
Cameron's the one person in the EU with the right ideas about how to deal with Syrian refugees - resettle a few such as widows and orphans, or persecuted Christians, but put the bulk of the efforts into maintaining the camps in neighbouring countries from which the refugees can return to Syria at the end of the war.
If he had proposed Merkel's solution, he would have been lynched both by his own party and the press.
Absolutely right. Cameron has been spot on over the refugee crisis. He has resisted Merkel's knee jerk idiotic response and come up with a proposal that helps those in most need without leaving the country open to am unsustainable mass influx of refugees and (perhaps more importantly) without encouraging people to commit suicide in small boats on the Mediterranean. On this issue at least it was Cameron who deserved the plaudits not Merkel.
I have to agree, even though I have little time for Cameron, he called it perfectly. Though he would have known well that he would have been job hunting had he agreed to let in droves of immigrants under any circumstances. Just a pity he does not display his backbone very often.
And Sturgeon was Merkel's little miss echo.
As were many others, your hatred of Scotland and the SNP is legendary.
I recall a suggestion prevalent on here that people shouldn't rush to judgment of Trump specifically or the US right wing in general since non-Americans couldn't really understand the nuances and political culture.
I'm sure none of the folk that made that point are now enthusiastically joining in the Angela kicking.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
The best defence against real fascism or real communism is to have a government that listens to the people and takes their concerns seriously and acts to resolve those concerns.
I recall a prevalent suggestion on here that people shouldn't rush to judgment of Trump specifically or the US right wing in general since non-Americans couldn't really understand the nuances and political culture.
I'm sure none of the folk that made that point are now enthusiastically joining in the Angela kicking.
Even if they were, that doesn't mean they are 'rushing' to judgement, there may still be sounds reasons for whatever view is taken, even with less knowledge of the German political scene.
''It's since emerged comparable things happened in Helsinki, Dusseldorf, and elsewhere.''
I would suggest the term 'behind the curve' was made for people like Mr Sox. Read the news, Europe is on fire.
Meanwhile a new poll has Trump beating Hillary by four points in a match up. That's BEATING Hillary. I read that on Breitbart. It's not a site I like, but hey, that's where the news is these days.
That poll was Fox, it is has already had 3 or 4 polls showing Trump beating Hillary and has Cruz beating her too, it is the only national pollster to do so
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
The best defence against real fascism or real communism is to have a government that listens to the people and takes their concerns seriously and acts to resolve those concerns.
Indeed.
What I was getting at was that when the respectable right is strong it crowds out fascists.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
The best defence against real fascism or real communism is to have a government that listens to the people and takes their concerns seriously and acts to resolve those concerns.
Indeed. To try and cover things up, to "prevent a backlash", will in fact make it more likely there is a bigger backlash down the road.
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
Mr. Eek, that's a flawed comparison, because we don't know how well, or badly, the others are integrating. There have been many reports on Twitter [which could, therefore, be utter tosh, or completely right] of covered up sexual assaults which were often against charity workers assisting, or trying to, the migrants.
The fact the media ignored what happened on such a large scale event, which was bound to come out simply due to the sheer number of victims and witnesses, and then some in the political class downplayed over a hundred alleged groping instances and two alleged rapes, does not engender confidence that we have a clear picture of the situation.
Rotherham was covered up for years, and other comparable disgraces have happened elsewhere. Downthread there's a reference to a German show, sounds like the equivalent of Crimewatch, not showing a crime because the suspect had dark skin and they didn't want to inflame tensions.
It is also worth noting that there have been reports for some time of sexual attacks within migrant camps against the relatively few women refugees. That should have been a warning and a clue. It was ignored.
@NickPalmer knows Germany better than me and he may be right that Germany has had a good experience of immigration. But that is in part because it has not had that much immigration by comparison with other countries. And there have been issues with the Turkish guest workers - in part in how they were treated by the Germans.
But that is rather a naive view. Within a few months of a massive amount of immigration, we are already getting reports of serious problems and German politicians are beginning to talk about reversing their previous policy. That does not seem to me to be evidence of sober policy-making. It smells of panic and a realisation that they may have bitten off more than they can chew.
As I was saying last night, I think women are entitled to expect the authorities to act vigorously to protect them and not let this become something they just have to deal with.
However I think the actual German response will be quite cautious. I could be wrong, of course.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
The best defence against real fascism or real communism is to have a government that listens to the people and takes their concerns seriously and acts to resolve those concerns.
Indeed.
What I was getting at was that when the respectable right is strong it crowds out fascists.
Agreed. And if the reaction of the political class is to call anyone with a respectable right wing view a "fascist" then they are likely to find people thinking that may as well end up voting for them. Crying wolf means that you end up being eaten by it.
''That poll was Fox, it is has already had 3 or 4 polls showing Trump beating Hillary and has Cruz beating her too, it is the only national pollster to do so''
According to the article, a December Fox poll had Hillary up by eleven.
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
Thats a quite pathetic comment. Grotesquely bigoted.
To be fair to Frederick, he would have hated the Nazis. He abolished torture, supported freedom of religion, punished war crimes committed by his soldiers, and was a gifted musician. By 18th century standards, he was a very enlightened ruler.
That's right. My mother, who grew up in Danzig while her father worked in Berlin, said some of the really entrenched opposition to the Nazis was from the reactionary traditional right, the Junker descendants of the Frederick tradition who felt that patriotism was good but Hitler was a criminal hooligan.
I think the history of many countries shows that the best defence against real fascism is a strong traditional right.
The best defence against real fascism or real communism is to have a government that listens to the people and takes their concerns seriously and acts to resolve those concerns.
Indeed. To try and cover things up, to "prevent a backlash", will in fact make it more likely there is a bigger backlash down the road.
The cover up always makes things worse in the end. Whether it's the Catholic Church covering up abuse, South Yorkshire police and social services ignoring child rape, German authorities downplaying sexual assaults, the anger and bitterness will always be greater (and the reputation of the institution more damaged) than if the issue were properly confronted at the outset.
Mr. Eek, that's a flawed comparison, because we don't know how well, or badly, the others are integrating. There have been many reports on Twitter [which could, therefore, be utter tosh, or completely right] of covered up sexual assaults which were often against charity workers assisting, or trying to, the migrants.
The fact the media ignored what happened on such a large scale event, which was bound to come out simply due to the sheer number of victims and witnesses, and then some in the political class downplayed over a hundred alleged groping instances and two alleged rapes, does not engender confidence that we have a clear picture of the situation.
Rotherham was covered up for years, and other comparable disgraces have happened elsewhere. Downthread there's a reference to a German show, sounds like the equivalent of Crimewatch, not showing a crime because the suspect had dark skin and they didn't want to inflame tensions.
It is also worth noting that there have been reports for some time of sexual attacks within migrant camps against the relatively few women refugees. That should have been a warning and a clue. It was ignored.
@NickPalmer knows Germany better than me and he may be right that Germany has had a good experience of immigration. But that is in part because it has not had that much immigration by comparison with other countries. And there have been issues with the Turkish guest workers - in part in how they were treated by the Germans.
But that is rather a naive view. Within a few months of a massive amount of immigration, we are already getting reports of serious problems and German politicians are beginning to talk about reversing their previous policy. That does not seem to me to be evidence of sober policy-making. It smells of panic and a realisation that they may have bitten off more than they can chew.
As I was saying last night, I think women are entitled to expect the authorities to act vigorously to protect them and not let this become something they just have to deal with.
However I think the actual German response will be quite cautious. I could be wrong, of course.
Agreed. The initial and default reaction has, sadly but not surprising to me, been just that: women should learn to live with it. If the people who thought that had to endure sexual assault - as I and far too many of the women I know have - they'd very rapidly change their mind.
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
ffs, I've just stuck my neck out saying there's no Germanophobia on here and you post that.
The real anger about Cologne is gradually coming out - it's the suspicion that the Authorities acted differently because of the race/ethnic element. Of course, in a million refugees. you'll have criminals, and given the culture of the countries they're coming from, a misogynist bent.
But as have been mentioned, if a thousand footballer supporters went on a rape/assault/ robbing spree, no one would be defending them or making any excuses, and the Authorities would have acted differently.
And we are getting the expected response from the more left-leaning sources ...
(1) It didn't happen, so ignore it. (2) It may have happened, but it was minor. (3 )OK, it was major but the most important thing is to stop a racist reaction. (4) Ooops! Talk about it as being due to males the wold over (copyright - The Guardian), or robbery, or something that could happen any time.
Rotherham was the template, but they've followed the script nicely so far.
(5) 'Things are different now.' (6) 'Lessons have been learnt' (7) 'Action is being taken behind the scenes'.
I'm enjoying the honeymoon with Southam and Flightpath today. :-) One of the charms of PB is that we sometimes find unlikely common ground.
I think Southam is right that both of us mainly see middle-class well-educated Germans. That said, they dominate German affairs to an extent not yet seen in Britain. The Western states in particular are an overwhelmingly middle class society in skills and attitudes - even the skilled working class with their extensive apprenticeships feel middle class and are keen on cautious politics, judicious thinking, etc. It's not an accident that there is only one successful tabloid in the whole country (Bild-Zeitung) - imagine a British media with 20 variants of the Times, Telegraph and Guardian plus one Sun.
kle4's assessment looks right too. In a prosperous society, Merkel's tactical and pragmatic approach looks better than it does in Britain, but I agree that people are getting a bit tired of it. There is a shortage of serious challengers at the moment, but I'd guess her political sunset is now in sight, perhaps 5 years from now.
A more general thought perhaps worth a separate article: are we seeing the gradual death throes of distinctive national culture? The combination of global market, easy travel, the internet and a lingua franca (English) is making sometimes uncomfortably rapid influx of people from other cultures the norm in nearly every developed country. It changes the culture of both the recipient society and the immigrants. In 50 years, will it be difficult to talk about a distinctive German or British or American society, rather than a constantly-evolving melting pot? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but maybe it's going to happen whether we like it or not, and we need to steer the flow rather than trying Canute-like bureaucratic ways (the "Englishness test" is a classic example) to stem it. (I don't have a brilliant solution either.)
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
ffs, I've just stuck my neck out saying there's no Germanophobia on here and you post that.
Bollocks!
That's not Germanophobia but the truth.
If you want to deny it then its you who has a problem.
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
Thats a quite pathetic comment. Grotesquely bigoted.
"That impulse is the only rational explanation for Angela Merkel’s mad decision to invite a million unscreened asylum seekers and migrants into the country last year (mostly in the last six months)."
Well, it might be German birth rates. It might be concern about the possibility of utter humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East. Either way, there are plenty of alternatives beyond "bloody Muslims, the woman must be mad". I'd rather hear about those first than shutting the analysis down if you're going to be doing this professionally.
There are millions of unemployed across the southern EU; there are millions more in (or from) the east of it who may or may not have jobs but could find better paid ones within Germany. All could be pitched to move to and settle in Germany to address the demographic problem. Why roll the dice on the migrants?
In any case, it's not just Merkel - it's the whole German political / ruling class. Were she so out of step, she'd have been opposed in her policy. It's only now, after serious consequences are starting to be felt, that voices are being raised against it - and even there, mayors, interior ministers and police chiefs are still trotting out the same old lines: it's the public rather than politicians who are leading the opposition.
The German willingness to obey orders, however mad, is frightening.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
ffs, I've just stuck my neck out saying there's no Germanophobia on here and you post that.
Bollocks!
That's not Germanophobia but the truth.
If you want to deny it then its you who has a problem.
In response to the query about the SPD, I missed David's post on this, but essentially I can't see the SPD playing a very effective role any time soon. They are divided between the membership, who on the whole dislike being junior partner to the CDU and want to be more left-wing, and the leadership, who see it as a necessary compromise to have any power. Their position is depressingly like the LibDems in Britain and if there was a spread bet on their seat count I'd be betting on "fewer" next time. What is keeping them afloat is that the only challengers to the left are the Left Party, which is seen as still too close to the GDR for comfort by floating voters and the Greens, who are light on serious profile and not as clearly left-wing as in Britain.
Is there any breakdown by age and sex of the 'refugees' Merkel has accepted ?
It would be interesting to see the proportion of 18-30 men among them.
This is another area where the media have perhaps been negligent. For whatever reason (political stance, wanting to simplify a story, dramatising a story, genuine compassion) there has been a great deal of airtime and column inches given over to the women and children from Syria.
Unfortunately the situation appears to be much more complex than that: not only in the numbers of young men (allegedly), but also that amongst the Syrians are a high proportion of people from other countries, both those where there are direct threats to life and those where there are not.
A quick Google has not produced demographic data for the refugees. One would be handy, but my suspicion (and it looks like this is a common view on here) is that Syrian women and children loved by the media are in a small minority.
Does anyone know where figures can be found? (Leaving aside issues of being able to identify where people have really come from). Eurostat perhaps?
I'm enjoying the honeymoon with Southam and Flightpath today. :-) One of the charms of PB is that we sometimes find unlikely common ground.
I think Southam is right that both of us mainly see middle-class well-educated Germans. That said, they dominate German affairs to an extent not yet seen in Britain. The Western states in particular are an overwhelmingly middle class society in skills and attitudes - even the skilled working class with their extensive apprenticeships feel middle class and are keen on cautious politics, judicious thinking, etc. It's not an accident that there is only one successful tabloid in the whole country (Bild-Zeitung) - imagine a British media with 20 variants of the Times, Telegraph and Guardian plus one Sun.
kle4's assessment looks right too. In a prosperous society, Merkel's tactical and pragmatic approach looks better than it does in Britain, but I agree that people are getting a bit tired of it. There is a shortage of serious challengers at the moment, but I'd guess her political sunset is now in sight, perhaps 5 years from now.
A more general thought perhaps worth a separate article: are we seeing the gradual death throes of distinctive national culture? The combination of global market, easy travel, the internet and a lingua franca (English) is making sometimes uncomfortably rapid influx of people from other cultures the norm in nearly every developed country. It changes the culture of both the recipient society and the immigrants. In 50 years, will it be difficult to talk about a distinctive German or British or American society, rather than a constantly-evolving melting pot? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but maybe it's going to happen whether we like it or not, and we need to steer the flow rather than trying Canute-like bureaucratic ways (the "Englishness test" is a classic example) to stem it. (I don't have a brilliant solution either.)
"In 50 years, will it be difficult to talk about a distinctive German or British or American society"?
Interesting question. Sincerely hope you are wrong on this one.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_colonial_empire
Mr. Dodd, most people, across the political spectrum, praised Cameron for his migrant stance whilst lambasting Merkel, even as both positions were being made clear. It's not especially new, because the implications of both positions were obvious to almost everyone right away.
This crisis was made worse by the over emoting over a poor dead baby on a beach. This baby had died on a Turkish beach I believe because a boat bound from safe Turkey to not much better Greece sank. This unleashes a wave of tolerance in media and public to permit encourage and sustain an exodus of refugees from the safety of Turkey. The most polite words I can use to describe this encouragement is 'foolish liberality'. As you say Cameron was right in his opinion and others should have listened to him.
None of which makes the fathers of such babies 'rapists' or female molesters, nor the vast majority of what must be a million or more migrant refugees. The reasons why they should not be there are quite different.
These people know how "human rights" work in Europe and that they can behave as they wish without serious consequences. Until this attitude can be changed then the problems will continue. A few plane loads of their peers being shipped back to a war zone might start to focus their minds.
The EU is literally the only place in the world where foreign criminals are not taken from the court house or prison straight to the airport.
Off to run some errands now.
Imagine if, for example, a mainly white football crowd had one hundredth of what happened in Cologne.
Wall to wall coverage for five days in the Guardian and BBC , questions in the House of Commons, police task force and possible full public enquiry.
And, finally, the idea that Germany needed to decide whether or not to gratify or disappoint the migrants' desires really annoys me. It is not migrants' wishes which should be the or the only determinant here. "I want doesn't get."
Patrolling borders and making it hard for those you don't want to get to you is what any self-respecting state should do. But no, Merkel et al spent time criticising the UK and other countries who pointed out the obvious problems.
The British economy unlike the German one is increasingly reliant on cheap, "flexible" (meaning non-unionised, compliant, migrant) labour working in low skilled, low paid, low productive jobs. Osborne's so called "jobs miracle", has overwhelmingly created zero hours contracts, low paying, low skilled jobs in which the worker can only live by claiming in work tax credits and housing benefit as a minimum.
As soon as these migrants, most of whom speak English, realise how hard German is to learn, find it difficult getting jobs and hear through the grape vine the easy availability of welfare benefits in Britain compared to the rest of Europe, they will head here and they will be perfectly entitled too.
About 10 years ago the Dutch gave a large number of Somali's residency and they suddenly came to Britain en masse. No wonder Cameron wants the EU referendum ASAP. In late 2016 and especially 2017 expect the immigration figures to show huge amounts of "Germans" suddenly migrating to the UK.
So the "impermissible" thing has a bedrock of WWII guilt with a more recent topping of guilt over treatment of previous emigration waves.
To be honest, it is more that Germany is in a similar social state to late 90s/early 2000s - I remember for example that, in reaction to allegations of persecution, the police were (effectively) withdrawn from policing "traveler" encampments in the UK. A policy that was only reversed quite recently.
It should be noted the biggest victim of that was, of course the travelers/gypsies. The encampments were taken over by the very worst from within their own communities who preyed on their own as a start.
It looks possible (but I would have to say far from certain - but possible) that an anti nuclear policy would have a similar effect to a deselection policy for the Corbynites.
Jervis could still stand as an indepenent. I wonder how many 'independent' Labour candidates there will e in 2020?
Just that the police have a difficult situation in attacking a mob of revellers in which some criminals are active, even when prepared as at Notting Hill carnival.
An innappropriate respnse such as water cannon could easily led to the deaths of innocent revellers.
Enlisting women to fight Khan is quite smart move in my book. It reminds voters of the 'different cultural approach' to women of many Khan's lovely associates.
Germany has on the whole a good experience of immigration - successive waves of Vietnamese, Turks and others (including Brits, for a while - remember Auf Wiedersehen Pet?) have been fairly seamlessly accommodated. The single case of hostility to what was seen as an ethnic group stands out in German minds as an epic national disaster. So the "foreign culture risks swamping us" line of thought which resonates in Hungary and Slovakia has limited appeal. Germany is very confident about the resilience of its national identity and its economic success - though the Eastern states rather less so, which is arguably one reason why the far right has made more progress there.
The political culture is relentlessly sober and rational: if it's felt that there is a need for more young workers (as there is), German politicians and most media eye with contempt anyone who shouts slogans - that's why Pegida hasn't spread far beyond its beginnings in a couple of eastern cities. And they're suspicious of the way that both domestic and foreign press seize on any evidence of problems. The initial reports suggested that there was an epidemic of violence in numerous German cities. There wasn't - there was a very serious problem in Cologne, and a few drunken scuffles elsewhere.
That said, nobody sane can take with equanimity a decision by 1000 people to invade a celebration and cause havoc, with crimes from rape and intimidation to organised theft. And it's prompted a "Hang on a minute, there's a real issue here" reaction in the press and the middle ranks of the governing CDU. Merkel needs to be seen to be cracking down on organised foreign criminality. But that hasn't really broken through to an overwhelming demand for a sea change in immigration policy. The reaction is more like after the youth riots in Britain - people want to see the authorities cracking down hard.
So do expect Merkel to sound tough in the coming days, but don't expect political Armageddon there. German politics and indeed German voters are too wedded to what they see as a rather successful status quo.
And FWIW I don't think Marine Le Pen has any realistic chance - I'd put her at around 20-1. Identity politics in France is very strong, and she's on the wrong side of it - a majority simply don't want to see an FN president.
You are probably correct, but I believe the situation is much more fluid than many believe, or at least would like to believe.
As I say the real anger isn't with immigrants. It is with people in power who have allowed this situation to come about, and whose response to these problems is 'whatever'.
My understanding of this mass of Somalis coming to the UK via Holland is that it numbered 20,000 over 5 years. My further understanding is that we the UK were the biggest destination for Somali asylum seekers then Holland second before this. Current figures for Somalis in Holland are about (as far as I can see) between 20 and 25 thousand.
Some official figures would be nice to know rather than your wild speculations.
And, given the media ignored mass molestation and a smaller number of alleged rapes, what else have they ignored?
The victims were abused by hundreds, were failed by the police, ignored initially by the media and then had their ordeal declared by Ralf Jaeger as being, at most, as bad as someone being a rightwing cretin on the internet.
The status quo has changed in Germany. More than 1% of the population was invited there this year by Merkel's idiotic siren call.
Such a shame.
Germany kept out the Eastern Europeans by putting 10 year transitional controls on them, along with every other EU country apart from the UK, Sweden and Ireland. It meant that Polish, Lithuanians, Latvians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Slovakians etc etc could not work or claim any type of welfare in Germany until the transitional controls had come to an end.
'Move along, nothing to see here eh?'
Best of luck with that.
And yet the decision was celebrated and will continue to be. Some do feel that being careful with refugees because done will be nasty characters is tantamount to labelling all refugees as nasty who don't denser with help, and a blanket call to come one all is appealing in its niceness by comparison.
Of course you never suggested 'it was all right' but such nutjobs do not want top listen to your argument.
The events in Cologne were disgraceful and shocking, but in being critical we should be critical of what took place not what was pretended to have taken place.
But you're right that the timing is right - long overdue, in fact.
That said, what do you make of David's speculation, in an earlier comment, that the SPD could do a Pasok?
''I have read numerous pieces of criticism of Cologne, and not once has any commentator come close, or even close to close, to labelling all refugees. ''
People aren't angry with refugees. They are angry with their own authorities.
The fact the media ignored what happened on such a large scale event, which was bound to come out simply due to the sheer number of victims and witnesses, and then some in the political class downplayed over a hundred alleged groping instances and two alleged rapes, does not engender confidence that we have a clear picture of the situation.
Rotherham was covered up for years, and other comparable disgraces have happened elsewhere. Downthread there's a reference to a German show, sounds like the equivalent of Crimewatch, not showing a crime because the suspect had dark skin and they didn't want to inflame tensions.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/09/dan-jarvis-jeremy-and-i-are-not-on-each-others-speed-dials
But to respond to Flightpath, I can't see many "Independent Labour" candidates, for the same reason as I can't see an SDP Mk 2 - the probability of simply splitting the vote in half is too strong. Older MPs who aren't happy will tend to simply call it a day. Younger ones will wait for a more propitious tide.
''analysis, comment, opinion, political strategy'' - Jeremy Corbyn is badly in need of some of that. Would you like me to put in a good word for you??
Secondly, not all the muslim invaders are engineers and doctors, very few are. Most, apparently have an IQ of about 85. They will find it extremely difficult to find work in an advanced industrial economy as well educated as Germany is.
What I find really interesting is how the elite can no longer control the narrative. The media only started talking about Cologne etc after it was all over the net. The same is happening with Trump in america.
I fear this is not going to end well.
But as have been mentioned, if a thousand footballer supporters went on a rape/assault/ robbing spree, no one would be defending them or making any excuses, and the Authorities would have acted differently.
And we are getting the expected response from the more left-leaning sources ...
(1) It didn't happen, so ignore it.
(2) It may have happened, but it was minor.
(3 )OK, it was major but the most important thing is to stop a racist reaction.
(4) Ooops! Talk about it as being due to males the wold over (copyright - The Guardian), or robbery, or something that could happen any time.
Rotherham was the template, but they've followed the script nicely so far.
The best defence against fascism is sensible and unemotional government.
Hitler was created by France's absurd reparations demands after WW1. They completely undermined those sensible Germans trying to steer the country in the 1920s.
That being said, I think her problem may just be the very familiar progression of one's faults and strengths through years of being in charge, to the point they become problematic. (Flanderization is a term I often think about with the trend, which is the process of TV characters having a major defining trait which exaggerates over time until it becomes their entire character, outlandish and problematic). Merkel's been in charge a long time, and looks set to be for a fair time to come as well, and she has an instinctive method of leadership which has served her well. But how adaptable is she? How much could she break from that mold she has set for herself if she had to? Her actions over Greece came across as that of a ditherer rather than someone who is merely cautious, incapable of deciding something because putting such things off for another time had always worked before. Like a cricketer strong in a particular stroke, she can overuse her tactics and even get out/make a flawed decision with what is usually a strength.
Try to keep up...
It's worse than that. It's the suspicion that the Authorities will sacrifice anything and anybody on the altar of their own morality. Including the people who have entrusted the authorities with authority.
The notion that the elected are meant to represent the people who elect them is completely alien to many modern politicians, and that is the real issue here.
@NickPalmer knows Germany better than me and he may be right that Germany has had a good experience of immigration. But that is in part because it has not had that much immigration by comparison with other countries. And there have been issues with the Turkish guest workers - in part in how they were treated by the Germans.
But that is rather a naive view. Within a few months of a massive amount of immigration, we are already getting reports of serious problems and German politicians are beginning to talk about reversing their previous policy. That does not seem to me to be evidence of sober policy-making. It smells of panic and a realisation that they may have bitten off more than they can chew.
I'm sure none of the folk that made that point are now enthusiastically joining in the Angela kicking.
There are stages in the increase in criminality:
Stage 1 - those who will criminals in any situation.
Stage 2 - those who will become criminals in they know they can get away with it.
By tolerating the first stage it will escalate to the second.
Finally there is a third stage when breaking a law becomes so widespread nobody thinks it wrong to do so.
What I was getting at was that when the respectable right is strong it crowds out fascists.
As is the German need to feel superior - which is what lay behind Merkel's madness.
However I think the actual German response will be quite cautious. I could be wrong, of course.
It would be interesting to see the proportion of 18-30 men among them.
Is Yes, Prime Minister still relevant to politics today?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35264042
According to the article, a December Fox poll had Hillary up by eleven.
Bollocks!
(6) 'Lessons have been learnt'
(7) 'Action is being taken behind the scenes'.
I think Southam is right that both of us mainly see middle-class well-educated Germans. That said, they dominate German affairs to an extent not yet seen in Britain. The Western states in particular are an overwhelmingly middle class society in skills and attitudes - even the skilled working class with their extensive apprenticeships feel middle class and are keen on cautious politics, judicious thinking, etc. It's not an accident that there is only one successful tabloid in the whole country (Bild-Zeitung) - imagine a British media with 20 variants of the Times, Telegraph and Guardian plus one Sun.
kle4's assessment looks right too. In a prosperous society, Merkel's tactical and pragmatic approach looks better than it does in Britain, but I agree that people are getting a bit tired of it. There is a shortage of serious challengers at the moment, but I'd guess her political sunset is now in sight, perhaps 5 years from now.
A more general thought perhaps worth a separate article: are we seeing the gradual death throes of distinctive national culture? The combination of global market, easy travel, the internet and a lingua franca (English) is making sometimes uncomfortably rapid influx of people from other cultures the norm in nearly every developed country. It changes the culture of both the recipient society and the immigrants. In 50 years, will it be difficult to talk about a distinctive German or British or American society, rather than a constantly-evolving melting pot? I'm not saying it's good or bad, but maybe it's going to happen whether we like it or not, and we need to steer the flow rather than trying Canute-like bureaucratic ways (the "Englishness test" is a classic example) to stem it. (I don't have a brilliant solution either.)
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/t31.0-8/q84/s960x960/11224695_10153873451334429_4444559430808593325_o.jpg
If you want to deny it then its you who has a problem.
PS. the plain fact is you have a mother from Danzig, which means you know more about Germany and Germans than 'AnotherRichard'
What a pathetic bleater you are.
Unfortunately the situation appears to be much more complex than that: not only in the numbers of young men (allegedly), but also that amongst the Syrians are a high proportion of people from other countries, both those where there are direct threats to life and those where there are not.
A quick Google has not produced demographic data for the refugees. One would be handy, but my suspicion (and it looks like this is a common view on here) is that Syrian women and children loved by the media are in a small minority.
Does anyone know where figures can be found? (Leaving aside issues of being able to identify where people have really come from). Eurostat perhaps?
Interesting question. Sincerely hope you are wrong on this one.