Left insanity in US scares EU: Right-wing leader Merkel utterly destroys social democrats in poll

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

I thought you hate Merkel? NOw you like her?

I can't keep up with who the alt right hates or likes.

 

[helltoupee]

If all these refugees are a boon to the free-market, then why aren't: South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel , China trying to take in large number of refugees (like Germany).

Those countries aren't taking in refugees because they are more homogenistic than the US - especially the Asian countries. They suppress individualism and ego-based ambitions given they are much more of a collective society than the West. Work ethic and loyalty to the group is encouraged, making outsiders a hindrance.

The West is built on individualism, and as such, needs a larger variety of people, to gain the best individuals for a more productive society.

 

[lecter]

this thread is hereby closed

 

[Trotsky]

Merkel is fucking insane.

I don't care what her politcial views are outside of the fact that she is pro globalist with an agenda to destroy German culture.

Pragmatism and intelligence in general can seem insane to morons like you.

There is no globalist agenda.

 

[lecter]

that's not true I'm also a globalist but I planned to keep that a secret

 

[7437]

Pragmatism and intelligence in general can seem insane to morons like you.

There is no globalist agenda.

of course there is a globalist agenda. A successful economy in 2017 is globalist by the very nature of trade. Any leader who isnt a total moron would promote globalism.

 

[Trotsky]

of course there is a globalist agenda. A successful economy in 2017 is globalist by the very nature of trade. Any leader who isnt a total moron would promote globalism.

Haha, okay, I am fine with this narrative.

 

[BVG]

Pragmatism and intelligence in general can seem insane to morons like you.

There is no globalist agenda.

Id hope for her sake that their was an agenda for letting a flood of a million + syrian refugees cross her borders unvetted.

I mean at least in her eyes their was a greater goal im mind for destroying germany.

If she just chose to do that on her own that makes her the biggest fucking political idiot in modern history.

 

[Trotsky]

Id hope for her sake that their was an agenda for letting a flood of a million + syrian refugees cross her borders unvetted.

I mean at least in her eyes their was a greater goal im mind for destroying germany.

If she just chose to do that on her own that makes her the biggest fucking political idiot in modern history.

It wasn't because she wanted to destroy Germany's culture: it's because she wanted to preserve Germany's economic competitiveness in the international community. Germany needed an influx of labor and economic stimuli to supplement its aging workforce.

Merkel is a conservative pragmatist, not a bleeding heart.

 

[BVG]

It wasn't because she wanted to destroy Germany's culture: it's because she wanted to preserve Germany's economic competitiveness in the international community. Germany needed an influx of labor and economic stimuli to supplement its aging workforce.

Merkel is a conservative pragmatist, not a bleeding heart.

Well i hope germany warms up to sharia law.

 

[snakedafunky]

of course there is a globalist agenda. A successful economy in 2017 is globalist by the very nature of trade. Any leader who isnt a total moron would promote globalism.

That is actually what a lot of people don't seem to understand when they wish back economic protectionism and isolation policies for the US.
Its not 1960 anymore where the US was the only economic superpower. Now you Japan, the EU, China and an upcoming India all competing together.
If the US starts to implement heavy taxes and import duties etc. the other large economies will do the same to the US and start trading more freely between each other.
Sure that will be bad for everyone but in the long run that would be the worst for the US.

 

[KILL KILL]

Merkel is right-wing like GWB was right-wing:

-They wear business attire.
-They're Caucasoids.
-That's it but that's more than enough.

GW invaded a country because God told him to. That's about as right wing as it gets.

 

[AviatorShades]

GW invaded a country because God told him to. That's about as right wing as it gets.

No, that literally has nothing to do with the right wing under really any definition (nor did he actually do/have the ability to do that), but it's a common television trope and punk rock lyric I suppose.

 

[ReAnimator Reagan]

Merkel is conservative'ish, atleast by European standards. Unfortunately, she also happens to be Christian.

Like Obama was a "christian"

GW invaded a country because God told him to. That's about as right wing as it gets.

So now we are blaming Lemmy??? RIP

 

[TheGreatA]

That is actually what a lot of people don't seem to understand when they wish back economic protectionism and isolation policies for the US.
Its not 1960 anymore where the US was the only economic superpower. Now you Japan, the EU, China and an upcoming India all competing together.
If the US starts to implement heavy taxes and import duties etc. the other large economies will do the same to the US and start trading more freely between each other.
Sure that will be bad for everyone but in the long run that would be the worst for the US.

The problem here is that we are whoring out Western principles by enabling the likes of Saudi Arabia and China to gain increased influence in world-wide affairs.

No one is going to protect the ideas of freedom and democracy unless we do it. China would gladly step all over such ideals, if it meant increasing their productivity. China steps over the used-up carcasses of its labourers each day, on its journey to becoming a global superpower.

"Protectionism" is merely the protection of certain key human rights, that our labourers here in the West have earned for themselves, at the expense of decreased capital profit for the bosses. Why should we subject ourselves to competing with a billion-man, illiberal, inhumane slave market? Why should we simply not shun them, until they adopt a more humane way of going on about business?

We still have the power to isolate them, but not for long. By 2030-2040, we will have made ourselves dependent on them.

 

[snakedafunky]

The problem here is that we are whoring out Western principles by enabling the likes of Saudi Arabia and China to gain increased influence in world-wide affairs.

No one is going to protect the ideas of freedom and democracy unless we do it. China would gladly step all over such ideals, if it meant increasing their productivity. China steps over the used-up carcasses of its labourers each day, on its journey to becoming a global superpower.

"Protectionism" is merely the protection of certain key human rights, that our labourers here in the West have earned for themselves, at the expense of decreased capital profit for the bosses. Why should we subject ourselves to competing with a billion-man, illiberal, inhumane slave market? Why should we simply not shun them, until they adopt a more humane way of going on about business?

We still have the power to isolate them, but not for long.

But how are we whoring out Western principles? We are now the most peaceful, educated, prosperous and free we have ever been. There wasn't a better time in human history than now. Or what western values do you mean?
Our populations have access to information that could only be dreamed of 20 years ago.

In Germany, we also don't whore out our workers. People now work the least amount of hours they have ever been and there is a push to cut that down to 35 hours a week. While work safety standard and regulations have are the highest they have ever been. And we are the most competetive we have ever been.
The US can have the same without whoring anyone out. They just need to have a modern manufacturing sector instead of charging people 50 Grand to go to college. And have the rest work for minimum wage. But they choose to have that system.

China has also moved in a better direction. With the increased prosperity, they will have a more educated population and will automatically become more democratic. They are much better now than 10 or 15 years ago. And they will have to go further into that direction to stay competitive. They will need a more educated population for the future.

 

[uppercutbus]

Germany needed an influx of labor and economic stimuli to supplement its aging workforce.

Merkel is a conservative pragmatist, not a bleeding heart.

Not working out for her with these immigrants being useless handout thieves, but that's her fault for having open border policy in the first place.

 

[ShinkanPo]

I thought you hate Merkel? NOw you like her?

I can't keep up with who the alt right hates or likes.

Lol there is a poster here who calls Merkel Madcow thiszshould be interesting.

 

[HereticBD]

WOW

 

[TheGreatA]

But how are we whoring out Western principles? We are now the most peaceful, educated, prosperous and free we have ever been. There wasn't a better time in human history than now. Or what western values do you mean?
Our populations have access to information that could only be dreamed of 20 years ago.

You seem oblivious to the fact that the level of prosperity you see now, was by no means achieved during the era of "globalism". Instead, it was achieved through the hard work of each and every citizen of their respective nation, working together for their common good, possessing a common ideal of what sort of a world they would like their children to live in. What has the globalist era given us, but economic stagnation, and the occasional depression? Artificial economic growth through artificial population growth?

Today's living standards are hardly different to those of 20 years ago, or even 30 years ago. Inflation-adjusted, today's average disposable income is no greater than 30-40 years ago. In fact, today's citizens may own far less property than citizens in the past. Obviously, life has generally improved as technology has improved, but it would be foolish to mark down technological progress as the result of "globalism" which has only truly been in effect some 10-20 years, especially in Europe, when many of the most ground-breaking innovations had already been achieved by the 90's. At that time, what was the EU, but a loose trade union which upheld certain rules of competition within the European market? It played little part in achieving the economic prosperity (and most certainly the technological advancements) which we enjoy from now. Most European countries were doing fine prior to the EU's expansion. Some have benefited from its existence, some have actually stagnated.

If we truly wanted to argue for "progress", then we ought to argue for war, because mankind never achieved greater technological progress than during the state of war. Even the internet initially originated as a technology intended for military purposes. Usually, we only figure out a commercial purpose for an invention after we've figured out a way to utilize it as a weapon.

In Germany, we also don't whore out our workers. People now work the least amount of hours they have ever been and there is a push to cut that down to 35 hours a week. While work safety standard and regulations have are the highest they have ever been. And we are the most competetive we have ever been.
The US can have the same without whoring anyone out. They just need to have a modern manufacturing sector instead of charging people 50 Grand to go to college. And have the rest work for minimum wage. But they choose to have that system.

You're whoring out your workers by subjecting them to a primitive survival of the fittest alongside the world's 7 billion people, without guaranteeing them their individual rights as natives of their respective country.

Instead, you treat them as replaceable cogs, to any third worlder willing to do their job, for less. That is what is at the heart of globalism, and people are waking up to the reality of it. The recent mass movements of millions were the warning sign. Once people properly understand that there are billions living under terrible conditions, in a world that is quickly growing over-populated, they will most certainly grow more aware of their own interests, and yes, far more protective of these interests. Far more callous too, unfortunately.

Oh, we haven't seen the effects yet, because for the most part, despite recent attempts, European countries have largely been "protectionist", European nations have largely been "ethno-nationalist", European nations have largely been sheltered from "global competition". We've had strict quotas of immigrants, with sub-10% minority populations, and have traded amongst each other within a single, controlled European market, operating under the same rules, with most countries possessing the same principles.

But if we truly open up the Pandora's box and subject ourselves to unrestricted "global competition", the German man and whatever he thinks of as "German principles" will mean nothing to the German state. Any man can assume citizenship, as long as they're willing to "put in the work" and be productive to the state. It doesn't take a genius to figure out, where this leads to, if you're thinking in the long-term. Your dreams of a 35-hour workday, will be a thing of the past. It will be a fantasy so ludicrously distant from the crude reality of having to work like an animal in order to match the immense productive capacities and man-power of the likes of China and India.

So far, you've always been accustomed to possessing a competitive edge over such countries. With the way you're freely giving up your ways of doing business, your specialized industries, your technological innovations, in order to borrow the use of their slave market, that competitive edge is not going to exist much longer. And then you'll realize what real competition is.

China has also moved in a better direction. With the increased prosperity, they will have a more educated population and will automatically become more democratic. They are much better now than 10 or 15 years ago. And they will have to go further into that direction to stay competitive. They will need a more educated population for the future.

Oh yes, they've moved in a better direction, like the USSR after Stalin. It is still a piece of shit regime that is willing to compromise any standard of living for its citizens in order to destroy their competition. They do not play by the same rules as we do, and never will. Today, they tolerate the existence of our businesses within their borders, but day after day, they're studying, they're copying, and they're replacing the European workers with their own Chinese workers, once they've understood the concepts. There will be a day when they will no longer need anything from us, when they are no longer a struggling third world nation burdened by a disfunctioning infrastructure, and that is the day when China will kick us to the curb. Because they do protect their own interests and willingly engage in protectionism, while we do not.

Mao Zedong once predicted that with the assistance of the "third world", China would eventually over-take and destroy the Western civilization, due to their own capitalist greed, due to their lack of principles. He was not wrong.