As Ambrose Pritchard recently suggested, it's tough to be able to say something honest and yet polite about the Germans these days.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2015/07/in-discussing-germany-you-can-be-polite.html
Some people, however, have a very low threshold for impoliteness and a very high one for dishonesty. I'm not sure whether Sumner says this here for this reason or out of plain ignorance-my guess is willful ignorance:
"The past week it’s been open season on Germany. Even I have occasionally bashed them for their views on monetary policy. In a way this is odd, because in many respects Germany has been (since 1945) almost like a model country. Other countries should try to be more like Germany. It’s also odd because Germany’s views are completely typical of the eurozone–so why single out that one country? Yes, France and Italy are a bit more moderate, but the other 15 are just as upset with Greece as is Germany."
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=29967
Sure, the Germans are just one more EU country out of 28 rght? Just like the US is just one more country in the IMF or 1 of 7 at the Security Council.
Steve Randy Waldman seems to be just a really polite guy who doesn't like to say mean things:
"If you are sympathetic to Greece and therefore mad at Germany, you are a sucker. If you think the Greeks are lazier and more dishonest than is usual in the human species, you are also a sucker, and have let a political framing cajole you into bigotry. If you think Germans are unusually cruel, you have also let politics make a bigot of you. If you are taking sides in a conflict framed as nation versus nation, you have already taken the wrong side. You’ve made a basic error, like picking a day when a tricky prosecutor asks whether you committed the murder yesterday or last Thursday. (I presume your innocence.)"
"Civilized people do not blame nations, even when publics of those nations are holding mass rallies in the street supporting bad actions. Civilized people hold leaders and institutions to account for the conditions under which their constituents’ passions got that way, if the passions are misplaced. This is not to assert, as a positive claim, that political leaders and elite institutions “control” the will of their populations. Like most causal arrows, this one runs both ways. As with creditors and debtors, where we impose the accountability is a function of which choice leads to better outcomes. However hollow it may ring (and however hypocritical in the face of what people who use this rhetoric have sometimes done) claiming that “we have no argument with the people of Oceania, only its government” is a healthy impulse. [1] As civilized people, we ought to try to define political, economic, and social institutions that make good decisions on behalf of polities. Those institutions should both genuinely represent the diverse interests and views of their publics, and also constrain and shape those views so that the democratic will of the polity is consistent with high quality outcomes in both a functional and ethical sense. When things go awry, it is those institutions we must hold to account. To hold institutions to account effectively we must hold people to account, but we focus our scrutiny on people in roles of disproportionate authority rather than extending it to nations as a whole."
"By all means blame Schäuble or Merkel or Varoufakis or Tsipiras. I have my views about who is more blameworthy, your views may differ. You may blame people like me, if you like, members of “the press” generally, and hold us accountable by reputation and career. My view is that banks and securities underwriters on both side of the Atlantic, as well as many individuals who worked in that sector, ought to have been held to much greater account for events of the financial crisis (but I also think it is too late for punitive accountability to make much of a difference now). You may disagree. These are all fine arguments to have."
"But do not blame “France” or “Germany” or “Greece”, do not blame the “United States” or “Iran” or “North Korea”, tribes and nations cannot be held to account, only institutions and leaders can be."
http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/6069.html#comments
I'm not so sure I buy this. First of all criticism of a nation state is not quite the same things as criticism of 'the jews' or 'the blacks' and this seems to be what he's assuming. Criticizing a nation is not quite like criticizing a race or an ethnicity.
I'd say that the Original Sin here is the euro system but you can't understand it if you don't understand what drives it-the French-German rivalry.
The EU is not about economic logic-it doesn't have an economic model not even a bad one-rather the euro is just a tool of the rivalry. It's about geopolitical ambition and national pretensions not economic logic.
France has seen the EU as a way to challenge 'the Anglo-Saxon model.' If you want to understand the French understand the truth in the saying that The French have never forgiven the world for losing it's Empire.
It complains so bitterly about Pax Americana-why? Because the French are the world's great humanitarians? Hardly-because they want it to be Pax Franco.
So what they have wanted from the EU was a challenge or buffer to the EU-namely 'Europe.'
As for the Germans-what do they want out of 'The European idea?' They want a vehicle, a Trojan Horse from behind which they can practice their nation's geopolitical ambitions without Europe immediately thinking about them invading Poland in 1939.
By the way if-just for a joke-you want to see a really anti-German book see here.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fourth-Reich-Jim-Marrs-ebook/dp/B0018QUCWQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1437397753&sr=1-1&keywords=the+fourth+reich
This old boy throws everything at Germany-he's actually an old British military man who remembers WWI. Yes-he declared Nietzsche their High Priest, though Nietzsche was very critical of the Germans himself.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fourth-Reich-Jim-Marrs-ebook/dp/B0018QUCWQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1437397753&sr=1-1&keywords=the+fourth+reich
But let us not become too anti-German. Let is listen to a truly great German band-one of my favorites. Here Laibach sings FIAT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdJh4dlpRTI
It's a great song and you have to say the lyrics are appropriate. Maybe this is what Merkel sung in Tsipras' ear just before he agreed to sign over 28% of his country to Greece.
"You are in black darkness and confusion. You have been hugger-muggered, and carom-shotted into a war, and you know nothing about it. You know nothing about the forces that caused it, or you know next to nothing. You ought not to be in this war. You cannot win this war."
http://lyrics.wikia.com/Laibach:F.I.A.T.
P.S. I do have to say that Waldman's politeness can often seem like complacency-certainly this is true of someone like Noah Smith. Lets' face it, his future's set no matter what happens in Greece. Am I talking about Walmdan or Smith? It applies to both, although I don't think that Walmdan lacks empathy.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2015/07/in-discussing-germany-you-can-be-polite.html
Some people, however, have a very low threshold for impoliteness and a very high one for dishonesty. I'm not sure whether Sumner says this here for this reason or out of plain ignorance-my guess is willful ignorance:
"The past week it’s been open season on Germany. Even I have occasionally bashed them for their views on monetary policy. In a way this is odd, because in many respects Germany has been (since 1945) almost like a model country. Other countries should try to be more like Germany. It’s also odd because Germany’s views are completely typical of the eurozone–so why single out that one country? Yes, France and Italy are a bit more moderate, but the other 15 are just as upset with Greece as is Germany."
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=29967
Sure, the Germans are just one more EU country out of 28 rght? Just like the US is just one more country in the IMF or 1 of 7 at the Security Council.
Steve Randy Waldman seems to be just a really polite guy who doesn't like to say mean things:
"If you are sympathetic to Greece and therefore mad at Germany, you are a sucker. If you think the Greeks are lazier and more dishonest than is usual in the human species, you are also a sucker, and have let a political framing cajole you into bigotry. If you think Germans are unusually cruel, you have also let politics make a bigot of you. If you are taking sides in a conflict framed as nation versus nation, you have already taken the wrong side. You’ve made a basic error, like picking a day when a tricky prosecutor asks whether you committed the murder yesterday or last Thursday. (I presume your innocence.)"
"Civilized people do not blame nations, even when publics of those nations are holding mass rallies in the street supporting bad actions. Civilized people hold leaders and institutions to account for the conditions under which their constituents’ passions got that way, if the passions are misplaced. This is not to assert, as a positive claim, that political leaders and elite institutions “control” the will of their populations. Like most causal arrows, this one runs both ways. As with creditors and debtors, where we impose the accountability is a function of which choice leads to better outcomes. However hollow it may ring (and however hypocritical in the face of what people who use this rhetoric have sometimes done) claiming that “we have no argument with the people of Oceania, only its government” is a healthy impulse. [1] As civilized people, we ought to try to define political, economic, and social institutions that make good decisions on behalf of polities. Those institutions should both genuinely represent the diverse interests and views of their publics, and also constrain and shape those views so that the democratic will of the polity is consistent with high quality outcomes in both a functional and ethical sense. When things go awry, it is those institutions we must hold to account. To hold institutions to account effectively we must hold people to account, but we focus our scrutiny on people in roles of disproportionate authority rather than extending it to nations as a whole."
"By all means blame Schäuble or Merkel or Varoufakis or Tsipiras. I have my views about who is more blameworthy, your views may differ. You may blame people like me, if you like, members of “the press” generally, and hold us accountable by reputation and career. My view is that banks and securities underwriters on both side of the Atlantic, as well as many individuals who worked in that sector, ought to have been held to much greater account for events of the financial crisis (but I also think it is too late for punitive accountability to make much of a difference now). You may disagree. These are all fine arguments to have."
"But do not blame “France” or “Germany” or “Greece”, do not blame the “United States” or “Iran” or “North Korea”, tribes and nations cannot be held to account, only institutions and leaders can be."
http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/6069.html#comments
I'm not so sure I buy this. First of all criticism of a nation state is not quite the same things as criticism of 'the jews' or 'the blacks' and this seems to be what he's assuming. Criticizing a nation is not quite like criticizing a race or an ethnicity.
I'd say that the Original Sin here is the euro system but you can't understand it if you don't understand what drives it-the French-German rivalry.
The EU is not about economic logic-it doesn't have an economic model not even a bad one-rather the euro is just a tool of the rivalry. It's about geopolitical ambition and national pretensions not economic logic.
France has seen the EU as a way to challenge 'the Anglo-Saxon model.' If you want to understand the French understand the truth in the saying that The French have never forgiven the world for losing it's Empire.
It complains so bitterly about Pax Americana-why? Because the French are the world's great humanitarians? Hardly-because they want it to be Pax Franco.
So what they have wanted from the EU was a challenge or buffer to the EU-namely 'Europe.'
As for the Germans-what do they want out of 'The European idea?' They want a vehicle, a Trojan Horse from behind which they can practice their nation's geopolitical ambitions without Europe immediately thinking about them invading Poland in 1939.
By the way if-just for a joke-you want to see a really anti-German book see here.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fourth-Reich-Jim-Marrs-ebook/dp/B0018QUCWQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1437397753&sr=1-1&keywords=the+fourth+reich
This old boy throws everything at Germany-he's actually an old British military man who remembers WWI. Yes-he declared Nietzsche their High Priest, though Nietzsche was very critical of the Germans himself.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fourth-Reich-Jim-Marrs-ebook/dp/B0018QUCWQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1437397753&sr=1-1&keywords=the+fourth+reich
But let us not become too anti-German. Let is listen to a truly great German band-one of my favorites. Here Laibach sings FIAT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdJh4dlpRTI
It's a great song and you have to say the lyrics are appropriate. Maybe this is what Merkel sung in Tsipras' ear just before he agreed to sign over 28% of his country to Greece.
"You are in black darkness and confusion. You have been hugger-muggered, and carom-shotted into a war, and you know nothing about it. You know nothing about the forces that caused it, or you know next to nothing. You ought not to be in this war. You cannot win this war."
http://lyrics.wikia.com/Laibach:F.I.A.T.
P.S. I do have to say that Waldman's politeness can often seem like complacency-certainly this is true of someone like Noah Smith. Lets' face it, his future's set no matter what happens in Greece. Am I talking about Walmdan or Smith? It applies to both, although I don't think that Walmdan lacks empathy.
No comments:
Post a Comment