How did we reach the threshold of disaster? Let's travel along a timeline of seven historical waypoints that have disrupted our lives and continue to lead us towards the coming mega-crisis.
Many of the waypoints that you have beautifully described harken back to the collective guilt from the Nazi period. The sins of our fathers, the death of many promising lives, the emigration of many brilliant minds has led to the passive confused state of present day Germany.
Yes, that was our original downfall. Just why we decided to let the country go to waste again after all that hard work of rebuilding that the generation of our fathers did, is beyond me.
Your analysis is brilliant in its depth of content and context. Yet, history shows that declining birth rates in western societies from a multitude of reasons combined with an influx of individuals with high birth rates from countries and cultures which have no interest in assimilating and have high birth rates is a recipe for cultural suicide. Not since July 1683, has Europe been in such a precarious position.
My father was in WW2. A medic in Italy. Landed at Anzio, was at Cassino, etc. he came out of the war hating the U.S. army and the government with a passion. And a real liking and admiration for Germans. He went to grad school in Germany, eventually. His lifelong best friends were a German and Austrian. He once told me I would never know the truth about the war, but what “they” were telling me was bullshit.
They say history is always written by the victors. Thus in East Germany until 1989 there were no Nazis, only communist resistance fighters, while right now threre are only fascists there, while the resistance fighters are all in the West. Go figure.
the sins of our fathers…you are making the mistake to take everything that has been told us about 1933-1945 at face value. The regime lies about absolutely everything, but this story is 100% right? But I understand that the search for truth on this topic will not happen until the last German boomer has vanished. Until then, rather take the pragmatic approach of „what does that habe to do with me? I wasn’t alive back then.“
BTW, that is why they had to invent the more global, eternal guilt of climate change. It is not bound by generations, nations or ethnicity.
Although I agree somewhat with the analysis, do not black pill.
Migrants can and will be sent back. Good relations with Russia can be established to acquire cheap energy , to bridge the time until we build back better atom and coal.
It all depends on getting rid of the globohomo muppets that form the Altparteien.
As long as native Germans are a majority, there is hope.
Much as I don't want to blackpill, as you call it, your optimistic assumption only holds up on a level playing field. Native Germans may still be the majority, but because they are heavily discouraged, delegitimized and generally let down by their own representatives, they do not behave like one.
I do find what my fellow citizens did to Germany to be one of the great tragedies of the 20th century if not the greatest tragedy (in its knock on effects). My grandfather was of course just trying to survive (as were they all).
I tell people that Germany is to this day a conquered state and politics there are not real. Atleast not if you think of Germany as being sovereign. That old line about the Greens being watermelons was always true.
The question is what happens to the Greens once they are removed from Communist controls?
In a German state whose political system is designed to prevent the rise of any party who is genuinely right wing, you can get truly demented Leftists into positions of terrifying power. Frankly, your Office for the Protection of the Constitution and it’s powers show that any kind of will of the people will be mercilessly repressed as long as it exists
I'm afraid that you are right with your of assessment of Germany's political system. Though frankly, I do not care what happens to the Greens after all this is over. I care about my country and my people.
I also do not care about the ultimate fate of the Greens. I meant that without being controlled by Communists, what would they do? I think the current state of Germany with it’s more insane social ideas is the answer
An absolutely brilliant essay that connects so much of recent history. Thanks for writing this. The degradation of Germany, one of the world’s great countries, is utterly depressing.
I believe indeed you are an educated economist. Your background and erudition rise from the page.
On the matter of the War on Terror and the Rule of Law : when it began I said
‘If you take your laws to war you lose the laws and the war. ‘
Indeed this happened.
The idea of law in war is ruinous absurdity as one day of war would teach you, indeed it may still. As far as condemning the desire for revenge… wait and see.
If you are still waiting, there’s understandable anger in the piece. Perhaps reading Junger’s Interwar essays would clarify.
As to “you’re with us or you’re against us” this was folly and the demand of a child… a Boomer cry from the 60s. But democracy being childish elects children, always. In this case Bush.
I’m afraid the idea of Human Rights laws applying to war is also childish and absurd, too long a peace makes for strange ideas.
The rest of the article is your German business, it’s certainly true these lunatics in DC insanely blew up the pipeline. The Ukraine war should also end and shouldn’t have happened, NATO should have been disbanded in 1991. Europe should be free, at least of America- and we you.
What isn’t insane is preventing a conjunction of Russia and Germany. Any approach to the Atlantic has been getting the same answer in English for 500 years, a reaction was predictable. We 🇺🇸 are Oceanic peoples 🇬🇧 from the beginning, 🇦🇺🇳🇿 🇨🇦 and to us the oceans are invasion plains, our steppes, our invasion corridor that runs for example from the Urals to France. The same answer was given in the Pacific in English to Japan and is about to be given to China, perhaps. We’re Oceanic peoples and are well aware of what oceans are for… it’s how we came into being. Right or wrong this is completely predictable… as was the reaction of the British to the invasion of Belgium in 1914. Predictable. The British saw the rail lines built towards Belgium and arranged alliance with France by 1907.
In our defense we 🇺🇸 and Great Britain have a long history of isolationist policies, the same cannot be said of most of Europe and much of Asia, ending on a hopeful note China does.
The point about the Oceanic peoples is a very interesting one to make. The irony being of course that while regarding two oceans as potential "invasion plains", the US have neglected its southern border as a convenient way in for intruders ;-)
I seem to remember that according to "Putin's court philosopher" Alexander Dugin the Anglo-Saxon Oceanic peoples and the Eurasian, landbound peoples (first and foremost Russia, but Germany too) are natural antagonists, even "spiritual" ones. Well, in that case it was against nature's laws when the US made us their vassal state after WW2 ;-)
Conversely, the German Kaiser scared the shit out of the British with his strategic fleet program in the early 1900s. That was Germany's first ever try to become "Oceanic" itself - and of course, in Dugin's world view, it was doomed. You cannot go against your own nature.
Thank you for this, excellent. Such a beautiful country, with a rich history and brilliant people, being ruined. The world can't operate properly without old Germany. We need her.
Thanks! Old Germany is no more, I'm afraid. As the title of Thilo Sarrazin's famous book from back in 2010 goes, "Deutschland schafft sich ab" (Germany Abolishes Itself)
Eine stichhaltige Analyse. Ich muss mir den originalen Aufsatz unbedingt anschauen. Der einzige Punkt, wo wir uns vielleicht nicht einigen, ist eigentlich der letzte; es ist mir bis heute gar nicht so klar, wie Deutschland -- Deutschland alleine, ohne Zustimmung aus Washington -- den Krieg in der Ukraine verhindern hätten könnte. Außer natürlich spätestens in 2014, durch die Unterbindung der Abhängigkeit an Russlands Erdgas (und eigentlich am Besten in 2008, nachdem es jedem klar wurde, dass Putin wieder bereit war, seinen Einflussbereich durch Krieg aufzubewahren und ggf. zu erweitern).
Aber diese Unterbindung hätte nur mit Erdgas aus dem Wattenmeer und aus den USA, mehr statt weniger AKWs, und Solaranlagen südlich der Alpen (teilweise in Nordafrika) geschehen können. Nebenbei bräuchten wir dafür eine politische Oberschicht, die bereit war, Russland mindestens als Konkurrent bis hin zum geostrategischen Feind Europas anzuerkennen und dementsprechend zu handeln. Diese Schritte hatten sich aus verschieden Gründen als unmöglich erwiesen -- die billige Energie schmeckte dem deutschen Bürger viel zu süß, und die Lüge, dass Russland auf unser Geld nicht verzichten könnte, war ihm viel zu schmeichelhaft.
Oder doch mit Russland zu arbeiten wäre eine alternative Lösung gewesen, und zwar um ihm die Ukraine wieder als Vasall zu gewinnen, ohne, dass Russland ein Tröpfchen Blut vergießen musste. Aber nach Euromaidan wäre dies ohne blütigen ukrainischen Widerstand nicht zu rechnen, und ohne Zusage der Amis schlichtweg unmöglich gewesen. Und wir hätten keine Hoffnung auf diese Zusage, denn das würde bedeuten, die USA gäbe zugunsten eines Gegners seinen eigenen Einfluss und seine eigene Macht freiwillig auf. Kein Imperium der Weltgeschichte hat so gehandelt; es ist unrealistisch, sowas von den Amis zu erwarten.
Deswegen bezweifle ich, dass die jüngste Krise eine mögliche Haltestelle war. Die Bremse war schon vorher glatt geschliffen, der Grad des Hügels schon zu steil. Der Zug fängt jetzt an zu wackeln, die Räder zu funken. Die Lokführer gucken aber nur noch nach vorn, sagen sich immer noch, am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen.
Thanks for your kind and thoughtful words that sound like “home”! Sorry for answering in English, I have made it my policy here just so everyone in the Anglosphere can follow the debate about this crazy, erratic, barbarian territory called Germany. Also, to improve my skills in my second language and develop a more natural routine of thinking in English.
Yes, you’ve spotted a weakness there: Of course, without the approval of the US Germany could never, ever have prevented the war in Ukraine on its own. It should read “that we, as a sovereign nation, could have helped prevent by means of diplomacy”, and has been updated now.
Where I don’t follow is your suggestion that Russia is Germany’s geostrategic enemy. Quite the opposite seems true to me. Historically, Russia and Germany had very strong and productive cultural and even economic ties. That’s where Alexander Dugin isn’t all wrong: We both are landbound peoples with huge hinterlands to profit from internationally, and of course both (at least partly) European. It’s not for nothing that the US and the UK – Oceanic peoples – have always feared an “organic” coaltion between our two countries. That doesn’t mean, on the other hand, that we should ignore Putin’s autoritarian politics, his ruthlessness against dissidents (even dissenting oligarchs) and other very problematic traits. But there was once something called realpolitik, and it should be rediscovered ASAP.
If you want to compare this essay to the original German one, be advised: It is not a one-on-one translation, and never could be. This here also is an updated version, as the original is from 2022.
Thank you for the acknowledgement, and I will forgive you for continuing the discussion in my own mother tongue -- though I could not resist the opportunity to practice my German, and I'm glad it wasn't alienating. I am a bit short of time now, but shall work up a more thorough explanation of my view of Germany's and Europe's relationship to Russia in good time, perhaps as a post in its own right. But I'll return tomorrow with the salient points for this discussion.
Okay, this week has been busier than anticipated, and next week I'll take a much-needed break from the digital world, but I will leave the bones of a reply here and work it up into a proper post after I return.
You are of course correct that Germany and Russia, both as states and cultures, share a long and deep history, which hasn't always been (and must not necessarily always be) contentious. And it is, as you say, critical that Germans in particular and Europeans in general rediscover and redeploy the vital tool of Realpolitik.
But the first rule of Realpolitik is that we must take the world as it is, and not pretend it is some other way; our imaginations and even our desires should be tempered by reality, constrained to the realm of the possible. And the fact of the matter is that Vladimir Putin, aside from being an oligarch and a gangster in his own right who's amassed an enormous personal fortune and commands the vast resources of his entire nation-state besides, sees himself as the champion and redeemer of a Russian imperial legacy which the exigencies of history have temporarily diminished.
His imperial ambitions encompass the resubjugation of Eastern Europe, possibly back up to the Elbe but quite likely up to the Vistula and incontestibly up to the Dneiper. (He also views Central Asia as Russia's natural subjects, and has recently militarily intervened in Khazakhstan, shortly before he kicked off his Ukrainian adventure; presumably that intervention was more "successful", or perhaps the exigencies of the unexpectedly-effective Ukrainian resistance caused a recalculation in Moscow).
The other fact of the matter is that Germany is an integral member of a military alliance founded implicitly on the premise of containing and combatting Russian imperial aggression in Europe. Many of Russia's former imperial subjects gladly joined this alliance as soon as it was practicable to do so in order to ward off future Russian imperial aggression. Germany's extrication from NATO, or the EU, or the broader US imperial system, are unlikely in the near future; certainly far less likely than further Russian aggression in Eastern Europe.
There is also the matter of Russian diplomats and politicians, men whose very heartbeats depend upon Putin's continued indulgence, publicly questioning the legal validity of the Two-Plus-Four Treaty and therefore the very legal basis for the existence of the modern Federal Republic of Germany. It is therefore exceedingly likely that Putin does not see Germany as a fellow land-bound people kept from a brotherhood on equal footing with Russia, but rather as a rival power to be undermined and perhaps subjugated yet again.
One day, the United States will turn its eyes from Europe -- I suspect once Russia has bled itself white on the fields between the Vistula and the Dneiper and has proven itself unable to pose any sort of challenge to the American sphere for the next several hundred years. But Germany will not be able to afford to turn its eyes away; when that time comes, we will need a political class willing to consider Germany's particular interests and to defend them where they conflict with Russia's. Thus "at least as a competitor, even to a geostrategic enemy of Europe" -- Russia is not (necessarily) a geostrategic enemy, but it is certainly no friend, and we will do ourselves no credit by pretending the road to friendship will be short or well-built.
Those are all good points and hard to argue with (apart from Putin’s “aggressive” plans for Eastern Europe, I don’t see the endgame there). But isn’t it the defining trait of realpolitik that you deal with a superior power whilest acknowledging all that is problematic about it–because you want to have a seat at the table and play your own humble game with the cards you were dealt? The alternative is to be left out, looked over and completely sidelined, like we are now. That’s why we Germans must use all of our diplomatic skills to find a precariously balanced place between the big powers. And heck, why not even, in ad-hoc coalitions with other nations, play the big bullies off against each other from time to time? While we have no military muscle, what remains of our economic might should be enough to tip the scales in our favor every now and then. Of course, technically we’d reamain a member of Nato, EU etc. The US want us weak–let’s play weak offensively.
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the waypoints you listed are not as significant as they seem. The origins of the current disaster are much older.
Change isn't always caused by "shocks". Change is often initiated by subtle or slow-moving events.
I take your point, and I think I didn't write that the coming crisis is exclusivly a result of disruptive events. You are right that change normally happens at the speed of tectonic plates and thus even goes unnoticed in many cases. It's just that under the cover of a disruptive event, interested parties can much more easily power through with their agendas – as, for example, the WEF does with it's "Great Reset". They even said openly in media interviews that now (meaning: during Covid-19) is the time for revolutionary measures that normally would never pass democratic checks and balances. Disruptive events cause chaos and panic, which is a prerequisite for for totalitarian regime change. As an example, take the economic and political crisis that allowed the Nazis to come to power through democratic elections in 1933.
Thanks! Well, Americans also touched us with many inspirations–and nowadays with hope via a platform called Substack and its wealth of great authors who still value free speech.
Thank you and I feel very much the same about Germany, a country I’ve always admired and whose contributions to everything that’s good and beautiful (per Schiller) is almost second to none. Being a Southerner, my feelings toward the USA are complicated. But I am absolutely sick to my stomach how American ugliness and stupidity has so infected Europe, saddled you with leaders that hate you, and destroyed German industry by making impossible any normal relationship with Russia (I’m an Econ guy too, so I was there for all your steps and I agree with your analysis). PS, I’ll be your newest subscriber soon.
Interestingly, a similar plan seems to have been executed in the UK, starting with Thatcher and the extinction of Britain's industral base– and even the US was Morgenthaued to a certain degree.
The modern global corporation affords anonymity to leaders who decide to move jobs elsewhere, or import barbarian populations and grant them the benefits and rights of citizens. In the old Roman Republic, the plebes would have amassed and marched up the hill to the house of any senator who proposed such legislation, and burned him and his family out.
“Too long a peace makes for strange ideas”, ain’t that the truth. War is our alma mater it teaches us what is important, the longer the peace, the further we drift, so inevitably we return to relearn. “Lest We Forget”, is an ironic statement 364 days a year: we always forget.
We are guilty of presentism, we think we are unique, this locks the gate of history behind which lies our progenitors lessons.
That was an impressive post, a quintessential effort post. Very intelligent and I learned much thank you.
I don’t think my little screed about war being our alma mater is dark or even new. Doesn’t everyone know this? No atheists in a foxhole, that old chestnut.
Sir, I believe you have to start in the late 19th century.
Between 1896 and 1903 imperial antagonism between Germany and Britain, in various contexts around the globe, inspired the popular perception of the German Menace as a distinctly imperial threat. Where the established historiography locates the beginning of the Anglo-German rivalry within the development of the naval armaments race after 1904, this study traces the British fear of Germany much earlier and, crucially, much further from the shores of the North Sea. The German Menace emerged from the context of imperial anxiety and crises in the empire, both in formal territories and areas of informal influence. By 1902 the stereotypes of German covetousness, autocracy and efficiency coalesced to form a powerful force in British society. Furthermore, through the study of this phenomenon, the interplay between political decision-making, popular sentiment and the media will be revealed. In the pre-war period Germany was imagined as a holistic menace to empire. For much of the long and diverse historiography of Britain and Germany before the First World War, the story has so often centred on dreadnoughts, invasion scares and European diplomacy. The ‘Age of Empire’, as Jan Rüger has termed it, is often treated as distinct from the era of Great Power politics.1 The imperial and global origins of the German Menace have yet to be examined within the context of domestic politics and popular debates in the imperial metropole. British domestic and imperial anxieties coalesced into a repertoire – akin to what John MacKenzie has described as an ‘ideological cluster’ - of anti-German tropes.2 A widely-recognised anxiety about a German Menace developed in popular culture formed out of apprehensions about German foreign policy and imperial aspirations. This impression of a threat to empire was constituted from themes common to other external imperial anxieties; the jealousy, autocracy and alleged conspiracies attributed to Britain’s traditional colonial rivals - France and Russia – were transposed onto Germany after 1896. https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/5094/2/Longson14PhD_Redacted.pdf
Interesting point indeed. I think you could even pinpoint the starting date of the British-German imperial antagonism to April 24, 1884. That's when the German Reich became a short-lived colonial power by annexing what was then Southwest Africa. And that, as you say, it was as far away from the North Sea theater as one can imagine.
Robert Louis Stevenson wrote a book about Samoa and the German and English struggle. War nearly broke out then. Robert Louis Stevenson arrived in Samoa in 1889 and built a house at Vailima. He quickly became passionately interested, and involved, in the attendant political machinations. These involved the three great powers battling for influence in Samoa – the United States, Germany and Britain – and the political machinations of the various Samoan factions within their indigenous political system. The book covers the period from 1882 to 1892.
The Democratic Party is collapsing, with it the alliances.
No replacement, certainly not the GOP (as you can tell, I vote Republican/GOP).
Europe breaking up with us of course is perfectly in accordance with the American people’s interests, more so than the Germans. We lost the Republic fighting WW2, we’ll be harder pressed to get it back with the alliances, which justify the Intelligence Community’s existence… which has become all but open gendarmerie rule, otherwise I wouldn’t mention it… the alliances are an unbearable and utterly unsustainable burden on my people, in particular the fighting stock, which I am.
The need for world peace created a Deep State, and then it got involved in our politics and we lost Nixon, and then Trump, and probably Civil War.
If not we’re leaving anyway, it just will be harder. I mean Germany no harm, but I don’t care enough to kill or die to … what? Save you from… ??? Brussels ??? Kebab?
Good heavens you must do that.
Or don’t, but you’ll perish.
On another note, the Morgenthau plan wasn’t enacted, unlike other plans, next to which Morgenthau at his worst is Mother Teresa. There’s no need to go over the details again…
Well, Mother Teresa wasn't exactly an angel herself, from what I hear ;-)
That's very easy for you to say, sir, just fight the US off! Do you know how mighty your military is and what a shambles of an armed force the Bundeswehr, which was systematically "clownified" (I just invented my first English word!) since German Reunification? But even if we wanted to base our emancipation on something else than military might, the German mentality would absolutely make such a move impossible. As Lenin famously said, If Germans ever stormed a train station, they'd buy platform tickets first. And what is more, in this particular case, it is hardwired in the (West-)German mind that America is our best friend, richest uncle, most benevolent sugardaddy and biggest brother rolled into one, and would never do anything bad to us. That it already does, and will do much, much worse is beyond most Germans' imagination.
Just to understand: Why and in what way, exactly, did the US "lose the Republic fighting WW2"?
And don't you think that without any alliances, the US intel community would find all the more reasons to exist, as they would then have a complete world of enemies to protect you from?
Finally yes, please, please do save us from Brussels!
The US Military which I know something about, is not going to fight you, or re-invade Germany, your actual problem is your government, which is all you need throw down. Do or perish.
If you won’t stand for yourselves you’ll perish. This is nature’s law.
The Republic was lost because the New Deal is by Law an Administrative government, these laws contradict the Constitution but that’s not a problem until we noticed, we have noticed.
Our Intelligence Community is a shadow Gendarme government that has come (foolishly) out of the shadows. Not that it can or does govern…
The Entire Intelligence community and the Administrative State it guards (badly) is justified by The Imperium of “Peace.”
Brussels is our puppet, we are the hand inside it and always were…
Apologies for having hurt your feelings re Mother Teresa.
And yes, I agree, Brussels is a US sock puppet. But as 80 percent or so of our German legislation meanwhile comes from there, that implies that we not only have to oust our government, but von der Leyen and her ilk, too. In which case, would the US stand idly by?
This was an excellent essay. I am sorry that my country has exported its suicidalism to yours.
Thank you! For such a transaction, you need an exporter AND an importer. Perhaps some of us share a collective death wish.
Many of the waypoints that you have beautifully described harken back to the collective guilt from the Nazi period. The sins of our fathers, the death of many promising lives, the emigration of many brilliant minds has led to the passive confused state of present day Germany.
Yes, that was our original downfall. Just why we decided to let the country go to waste again after all that hard work of rebuilding that the generation of our fathers did, is beyond me.
Your analysis is brilliant in its depth of content and context. Yet, history shows that declining birth rates in western societies from a multitude of reasons combined with an influx of individuals with high birth rates from countries and cultures which have no interest in assimilating and have high birth rates is a recipe for cultural suicide. Not since July 1683, has Europe been in such a precarious position.
My father was in WW2. A medic in Italy. Landed at Anzio, was at Cassino, etc. he came out of the war hating the U.S. army and the government with a passion. And a real liking and admiration for Germans. He went to grad school in Germany, eventually. His lifelong best friends were a German and Austrian. He once told me I would never know the truth about the war, but what “they” were telling me was bullshit.
They say history is always written by the victors. Thus in East Germany until 1989 there were no Nazis, only communist resistance fighters, while right now threre are only fascists there, while the resistance fighters are all in the West. Go figure.
the sins of our fathers…you are making the mistake to take everything that has been told us about 1933-1945 at face value. The regime lies about absolutely everything, but this story is 100% right? But I understand that the search for truth on this topic will not happen until the last German boomer has vanished. Until then, rather take the pragmatic approach of „what does that habe to do with me? I wasn’t alive back then.“
BTW, that is why they had to invent the more global, eternal guilt of climate change. It is not bound by generations, nations or ethnicity.
You said it, brother. What they tell us isn’t accurate.
Although I agree somewhat with the analysis, do not black pill.
Migrants can and will be sent back. Good relations with Russia can be established to acquire cheap energy , to bridge the time until we build back better atom and coal.
It all depends on getting rid of the globohomo muppets that form the Altparteien.
As long as native Germans are a majority, there is hope.
Much as I don't want to blackpill, as you call it, your optimistic assumption only holds up on a level playing field. Native Germans may still be the majority, but because they are heavily discouraged, delegitimized and generally let down by their own representatives, they do not behave like one.
I do find what my fellow citizens did to Germany to be one of the great tragedies of the 20th century if not the greatest tragedy (in its knock on effects). My grandfather was of course just trying to survive (as were they all).
I tell people that Germany is to this day a conquered state and politics there are not real. Atleast not if you think of Germany as being sovereign. That old line about the Greens being watermelons was always true.
The question is what happens to the Greens once they are removed from Communist controls?
In a German state whose political system is designed to prevent the rise of any party who is genuinely right wing, you can get truly demented Leftists into positions of terrifying power. Frankly, your Office for the Protection of the Constitution and it’s powers show that any kind of will of the people will be mercilessly repressed as long as it exists
I'm afraid that you are right with your of assessment of Germany's political system. Though frankly, I do not care what happens to the Greens after all this is over. I care about my country and my people.
I also do not care about the ultimate fate of the Greens. I meant that without being controlled by Communists, what would they do? I think the current state of Germany with it’s more insane social ideas is the answer
An absolutely brilliant essay that connects so much of recent history. Thanks for writing this. The degradation of Germany, one of the world’s great countries, is utterly depressing.
We are the same age.
I’m American.
I believe indeed you are an educated economist. Your background and erudition rise from the page.
On the matter of the War on Terror and the Rule of Law : when it began I said
‘If you take your laws to war you lose the laws and the war. ‘
Indeed this happened.
The idea of law in war is ruinous absurdity as one day of war would teach you, indeed it may still. As far as condemning the desire for revenge… wait and see.
If you are still waiting, there’s understandable anger in the piece. Perhaps reading Junger’s Interwar essays would clarify.
As to “you’re with us or you’re against us” this was folly and the demand of a child… a Boomer cry from the 60s. But democracy being childish elects children, always. In this case Bush.
I’m afraid the idea of Human Rights laws applying to war is also childish and absurd, too long a peace makes for strange ideas.
The rest of the article is your German business, it’s certainly true these lunatics in DC insanely blew up the pipeline. The Ukraine war should also end and shouldn’t have happened, NATO should have been disbanded in 1991. Europe should be free, at least of America- and we you.
What isn’t insane is preventing a conjunction of Russia and Germany. Any approach to the Atlantic has been getting the same answer in English for 500 years, a reaction was predictable. We 🇺🇸 are Oceanic peoples 🇬🇧 from the beginning, 🇦🇺🇳🇿 🇨🇦 and to us the oceans are invasion plains, our steppes, our invasion corridor that runs for example from the Urals to France. The same answer was given in the Pacific in English to Japan and is about to be given to China, perhaps. We’re Oceanic peoples and are well aware of what oceans are for… it’s how we came into being. Right or wrong this is completely predictable… as was the reaction of the British to the invasion of Belgium in 1914. Predictable. The British saw the rail lines built towards Belgium and arranged alliance with France by 1907.
In our defense we 🇺🇸 and Great Britain have a long history of isolationist policies, the same cannot be said of most of Europe and much of Asia, ending on a hopeful note China does.
Good luck, and yes we should see each other off.
Tchuss.
The point about the Oceanic peoples is a very interesting one to make. The irony being of course that while regarding two oceans as potential "invasion plains", the US have neglected its southern border as a convenient way in for intruders ;-)
I seem to remember that according to "Putin's court philosopher" Alexander Dugin the Anglo-Saxon Oceanic peoples and the Eurasian, landbound peoples (first and foremost Russia, but Germany too) are natural antagonists, even "spiritual" ones. Well, in that case it was against nature's laws when the US made us their vassal state after WW2 ;-)
Conversely, the German Kaiser scared the shit out of the British with his strategic fleet program in the early 1900s. That was Germany's first ever try to become "Oceanic" itself - and of course, in Dugin's world view, it was doomed. You cannot go against your own nature.
Unfortunately we’re absorbing Mexico. WW1 and WW2 we reluctantly came in. Adam Tooze covers this brilliantly in “Deluge.”
We should have ended NATO in 1991. Madness to move East.
The Oceanic peoples vs the Land peoples, yes an old theme. I’m afraid the interventionists are correct on that score.
The Americans now worth listening to want space, not the Eastern Hemisphere.
The present madness passes, and we’re leaving so good news.
We 🇺🇸 have no need of Empire.
Great Britain has a long history of isolationist policies? That's news to the rest of the world.
You have to go back through history, yes. The 19th century splendid isolation period for a later example. I’m referring to Europe of course.
Thank you for this, excellent. Such a beautiful country, with a rich history and brilliant people, being ruined. The world can't operate properly without old Germany. We need her.
Thanks! Old Germany is no more, I'm afraid. As the title of Thilo Sarrazin's famous book from back in 2010 goes, "Deutschland schafft sich ab" (Germany Abolishes Itself)
Eine stichhaltige Analyse. Ich muss mir den originalen Aufsatz unbedingt anschauen. Der einzige Punkt, wo wir uns vielleicht nicht einigen, ist eigentlich der letzte; es ist mir bis heute gar nicht so klar, wie Deutschland -- Deutschland alleine, ohne Zustimmung aus Washington -- den Krieg in der Ukraine verhindern hätten könnte. Außer natürlich spätestens in 2014, durch die Unterbindung der Abhängigkeit an Russlands Erdgas (und eigentlich am Besten in 2008, nachdem es jedem klar wurde, dass Putin wieder bereit war, seinen Einflussbereich durch Krieg aufzubewahren und ggf. zu erweitern).
Aber diese Unterbindung hätte nur mit Erdgas aus dem Wattenmeer und aus den USA, mehr statt weniger AKWs, und Solaranlagen südlich der Alpen (teilweise in Nordafrika) geschehen können. Nebenbei bräuchten wir dafür eine politische Oberschicht, die bereit war, Russland mindestens als Konkurrent bis hin zum geostrategischen Feind Europas anzuerkennen und dementsprechend zu handeln. Diese Schritte hatten sich aus verschieden Gründen als unmöglich erwiesen -- die billige Energie schmeckte dem deutschen Bürger viel zu süß, und die Lüge, dass Russland auf unser Geld nicht verzichten könnte, war ihm viel zu schmeichelhaft.
Oder doch mit Russland zu arbeiten wäre eine alternative Lösung gewesen, und zwar um ihm die Ukraine wieder als Vasall zu gewinnen, ohne, dass Russland ein Tröpfchen Blut vergießen musste. Aber nach Euromaidan wäre dies ohne blütigen ukrainischen Widerstand nicht zu rechnen, und ohne Zusage der Amis schlichtweg unmöglich gewesen. Und wir hätten keine Hoffnung auf diese Zusage, denn das würde bedeuten, die USA gäbe zugunsten eines Gegners seinen eigenen Einfluss und seine eigene Macht freiwillig auf. Kein Imperium der Weltgeschichte hat so gehandelt; es ist unrealistisch, sowas von den Amis zu erwarten.
Deswegen bezweifle ich, dass die jüngste Krise eine mögliche Haltestelle war. Die Bremse war schon vorher glatt geschliffen, der Grad des Hügels schon zu steil. Der Zug fängt jetzt an zu wackeln, die Räder zu funken. Die Lokführer gucken aber nur noch nach vorn, sagen sich immer noch, am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen.
Mal sehen.
Thanks for your kind and thoughtful words that sound like “home”! Sorry for answering in English, I have made it my policy here just so everyone in the Anglosphere can follow the debate about this crazy, erratic, barbarian territory called Germany. Also, to improve my skills in my second language and develop a more natural routine of thinking in English.
Yes, you’ve spotted a weakness there: Of course, without the approval of the US Germany could never, ever have prevented the war in Ukraine on its own. It should read “that we, as a sovereign nation, could have helped prevent by means of diplomacy”, and has been updated now.
Where I don’t follow is your suggestion that Russia is Germany’s geostrategic enemy. Quite the opposite seems true to me. Historically, Russia and Germany had very strong and productive cultural and even economic ties. That’s where Alexander Dugin isn’t all wrong: We both are landbound peoples with huge hinterlands to profit from internationally, and of course both (at least partly) European. It’s not for nothing that the US and the UK – Oceanic peoples – have always feared an “organic” coaltion between our two countries. That doesn’t mean, on the other hand, that we should ignore Putin’s autoritarian politics, his ruthlessness against dissidents (even dissenting oligarchs) and other very problematic traits. But there was once something called realpolitik, and it should be rediscovered ASAP.
If you want to compare this essay to the original German one, be advised: It is not a one-on-one translation, and never could be. This here also is an updated version, as the original is from 2022.
Thank you for the acknowledgement, and I will forgive you for continuing the discussion in my own mother tongue -- though I could not resist the opportunity to practice my German, and I'm glad it wasn't alienating. I am a bit short of time now, but shall work up a more thorough explanation of my view of Germany's and Europe's relationship to Russia in good time, perhaps as a post in its own right. But I'll return tomorrow with the salient points for this discussion.
Okay, this week has been busier than anticipated, and next week I'll take a much-needed break from the digital world, but I will leave the bones of a reply here and work it up into a proper post after I return.
You are of course correct that Germany and Russia, both as states and cultures, share a long and deep history, which hasn't always been (and must not necessarily always be) contentious. And it is, as you say, critical that Germans in particular and Europeans in general rediscover and redeploy the vital tool of Realpolitik.
But the first rule of Realpolitik is that we must take the world as it is, and not pretend it is some other way; our imaginations and even our desires should be tempered by reality, constrained to the realm of the possible. And the fact of the matter is that Vladimir Putin, aside from being an oligarch and a gangster in his own right who's amassed an enormous personal fortune and commands the vast resources of his entire nation-state besides, sees himself as the champion and redeemer of a Russian imperial legacy which the exigencies of history have temporarily diminished.
His imperial ambitions encompass the resubjugation of Eastern Europe, possibly back up to the Elbe but quite likely up to the Vistula and incontestibly up to the Dneiper. (He also views Central Asia as Russia's natural subjects, and has recently militarily intervened in Khazakhstan, shortly before he kicked off his Ukrainian adventure; presumably that intervention was more "successful", or perhaps the exigencies of the unexpectedly-effective Ukrainian resistance caused a recalculation in Moscow).
The other fact of the matter is that Germany is an integral member of a military alliance founded implicitly on the premise of containing and combatting Russian imperial aggression in Europe. Many of Russia's former imperial subjects gladly joined this alliance as soon as it was practicable to do so in order to ward off future Russian imperial aggression. Germany's extrication from NATO, or the EU, or the broader US imperial system, are unlikely in the near future; certainly far less likely than further Russian aggression in Eastern Europe.
There is also the matter of Russian diplomats and politicians, men whose very heartbeats depend upon Putin's continued indulgence, publicly questioning the legal validity of the Two-Plus-Four Treaty and therefore the very legal basis for the existence of the modern Federal Republic of Germany. It is therefore exceedingly likely that Putin does not see Germany as a fellow land-bound people kept from a brotherhood on equal footing with Russia, but rather as a rival power to be undermined and perhaps subjugated yet again.
One day, the United States will turn its eyes from Europe -- I suspect once Russia has bled itself white on the fields between the Vistula and the Dneiper and has proven itself unable to pose any sort of challenge to the American sphere for the next several hundred years. But Germany will not be able to afford to turn its eyes away; when that time comes, we will need a political class willing to consider Germany's particular interests and to defend them where they conflict with Russia's. Thus "at least as a competitor, even to a geostrategic enemy of Europe" -- Russia is not (necessarily) a geostrategic enemy, but it is certainly no friend, and we will do ourselves no credit by pretending the road to friendship will be short or well-built.
Those are all good points and hard to argue with (apart from Putin’s “aggressive” plans for Eastern Europe, I don’t see the endgame there). But isn’t it the defining trait of realpolitik that you deal with a superior power whilest acknowledging all that is problematic about it–because you want to have a seat at the table and play your own humble game with the cards you were dealt? The alternative is to be left out, looked over and completely sidelined, like we are now. That’s why we Germans must use all of our diplomatic skills to find a precariously balanced place between the big powers. And heck, why not even, in ad-hoc coalitions with other nations, play the big bullies off against each other from time to time? While we have no military muscle, what remains of our economic might should be enough to tip the scales in our favor every now and then. Of course, technically we’d reamain a member of Nato, EU etc. The US want us weak–let’s play weak offensively.
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the waypoints you listed are not as significant as they seem. The origins of the current disaster are much older.
Change isn't always caused by "shocks". Change is often initiated by subtle or slow-moving events.
I take your point, and I think I didn't write that the coming crisis is exclusivly a result of disruptive events. You are right that change normally happens at the speed of tectonic plates and thus even goes unnoticed in many cases. It's just that under the cover of a disruptive event, interested parties can much more easily power through with their agendas – as, for example, the WEF does with it's "Great Reset". They even said openly in media interviews that now (meaning: during Covid-19) is the time for revolutionary measures that normally would never pass democratic checks and balances. Disruptive events cause chaos and panic, which is a prerequisite for for totalitarian regime change. As an example, take the economic and political crisis that allowed the Nazis to come to power through democratic elections in 1933.
The German leaders inherited an excellent estate, and faced with the burden of taking care of it, they said:
"Globalist ideology and best practices, take this estate away from me - thy will be done."
https://argomend.substack.com/p/responsaintbility
Great essay. Americans are the ruin of everything they touch and I am sorry they touched Germany.
Thanks! Well, Americans also touched us with many inspirations–and nowadays with hope via a platform called Substack and its wealth of great authors who still value free speech.
Thank you and I feel very much the same about Germany, a country I’ve always admired and whose contributions to everything that’s good and beautiful (per Schiller) is almost second to none. Being a Southerner, my feelings toward the USA are complicated. But I am absolutely sick to my stomach how American ugliness and stupidity has so infected Europe, saddled you with leaders that hate you, and destroyed German industry by making impossible any normal relationship with Russia (I’m an Econ guy too, so I was there for all your steps and I agree with your analysis). PS, I’ll be your newest subscriber soon.
Henry Morgenthau is overjoyed. The Germans belatedly implement his great plan for them.
Interestingly, a similar plan seems to have been executed in the UK, starting with Thatcher and the extinction of Britain's industral base– and even the US was Morgenthaued to a certain degree.
The modern global corporation affords anonymity to leaders who decide to move jobs elsewhere, or import barbarian populations and grant them the benefits and rights of citizens. In the old Roman Republic, the plebes would have amassed and marched up the hill to the house of any senator who proposed such legislation, and burned him and his family out.
Yes. Under the banner of Hayek and the Austrian School.
“Too long a peace makes for strange ideas”, ain’t that the truth. War is our alma mater it teaches us what is important, the longer the peace, the further we drift, so inevitably we return to relearn. “Lest We Forget”, is an ironic statement 364 days a year: we always forget.
We are guilty of presentism, we think we are unique, this locks the gate of history behind which lies our progenitors lessons.
Dark but deep!
That was an impressive post, a quintessential effort post. Very intelligent and I learned much thank you.
I don’t think my little screed about war being our alma mater is dark or even new. Doesn’t everyone know this? No atheists in a foxhole, that old chestnut.
Sir, I believe you have to start in the late 19th century.
Between 1896 and 1903 imperial antagonism between Germany and Britain, in various contexts around the globe, inspired the popular perception of the German Menace as a distinctly imperial threat. Where the established historiography locates the beginning of the Anglo-German rivalry within the development of the naval armaments race after 1904, this study traces the British fear of Germany much earlier and, crucially, much further from the shores of the North Sea. The German Menace emerged from the context of imperial anxiety and crises in the empire, both in formal territories and areas of informal influence. By 1902 the stereotypes of German covetousness, autocracy and efficiency coalesced to form a powerful force in British society. Furthermore, through the study of this phenomenon, the interplay between political decision-making, popular sentiment and the media will be revealed. In the pre-war period Germany was imagined as a holistic menace to empire. For much of the long and diverse historiography of Britain and Germany before the First World War, the story has so often centred on dreadnoughts, invasion scares and European diplomacy. The ‘Age of Empire’, as Jan Rüger has termed it, is often treated as distinct from the era of Great Power politics.1 The imperial and global origins of the German Menace have yet to be examined within the context of domestic politics and popular debates in the imperial metropole. British domestic and imperial anxieties coalesced into a repertoire – akin to what John MacKenzie has described as an ‘ideological cluster’ - of anti-German tropes.2 A widely-recognised anxiety about a German Menace developed in popular culture formed out of apprehensions about German foreign policy and imperial aspirations. This impression of a threat to empire was constituted from themes common to other external imperial anxieties; the jealousy, autocracy and alleged conspiracies attributed to Britain’s traditional colonial rivals - France and Russia – were transposed onto Germany after 1896. https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/5094/2/Longson14PhD_Redacted.pdf
Interesting point indeed. I think you could even pinpoint the starting date of the British-German imperial antagonism to April 24, 1884. That's when the German Reich became a short-lived colonial power by annexing what was then Southwest Africa. And that, as you say, it was as far away from the North Sea theater as one can imagine.
Robert Louis Stevenson wrote a book about Samoa and the German and English struggle. War nearly broke out then. Robert Louis Stevenson arrived in Samoa in 1889 and built a house at Vailima. He quickly became passionately interested, and involved, in the attendant political machinations. These involved the three great powers battling for influence in Samoa – the United States, Germany and Britain – and the political machinations of the various Samoan factions within their indigenous political system. The book covers the period from 1882 to 1892.
An Excellent Chronology of Germany's Descent into the coming DOOM, gloom & despair...
Bravo! Fantastic Analysis!
Thank you, but you know, I'd rather have no need to analyze something as frustrating as this.
You have to fight. Us. 🇺🇸. Off.
Now couldn’t be a better time.
Don’t miss your chance.
The Democratic Party is collapsing, with it the alliances.
No replacement, certainly not the GOP (as you can tell, I vote Republican/GOP).
Europe breaking up with us of course is perfectly in accordance with the American people’s interests, more so than the Germans. We lost the Republic fighting WW2, we’ll be harder pressed to get it back with the alliances, which justify the Intelligence Community’s existence… which has become all but open gendarmerie rule, otherwise I wouldn’t mention it… the alliances are an unbearable and utterly unsustainable burden on my people, in particular the fighting stock, which I am.
The need for world peace created a Deep State, and then it got involved in our politics and we lost Nixon, and then Trump, and probably Civil War.
If not we’re leaving anyway, it just will be harder. I mean Germany no harm, but I don’t care enough to kill or die to … what? Save you from… ??? Brussels ??? Kebab?
Good heavens you must do that.
Or don’t, but you’ll perish.
On another note, the Morgenthau plan wasn’t enacted, unlike other plans, next to which Morgenthau at his worst is Mother Teresa. There’s no need to go over the details again…
Well, Mother Teresa wasn't exactly an angel herself, from what I hear ;-)
That's very easy for you to say, sir, just fight the US off! Do you know how mighty your military is and what a shambles of an armed force the Bundeswehr, which was systematically "clownified" (I just invented my first English word!) since German Reunification? But even if we wanted to base our emancipation on something else than military might, the German mentality would absolutely make such a move impossible. As Lenin famously said, If Germans ever stormed a train station, they'd buy platform tickets first. And what is more, in this particular case, it is hardwired in the (West-)German mind that America is our best friend, richest uncle, most benevolent sugardaddy and biggest brother rolled into one, and would never do anything bad to us. That it already does, and will do much, much worse is beyond most Germans' imagination.
Just to understand: Why and in what way, exactly, did the US "lose the Republic fighting WW2"?
And don't you think that without any alliances, the US intel community would find all the more reasons to exist, as they would then have a complete world of enemies to protect you from?
Finally yes, please, please do save us from Brussels!
Nothing is gained by sarc about a saint.
The US Military which I know something about, is not going to fight you, or re-invade Germany, your actual problem is your government, which is all you need throw down. Do or perish.
If you won’t stand for yourselves you’ll perish. This is nature’s law.
The Republic was lost because the New Deal is by Law an Administrative government, these laws contradict the Constitution but that’s not a problem until we noticed, we have noticed.
Our Intelligence Community is a shadow Gendarme government that has come (foolishly) out of the shadows. Not that it can or does govern…
The Entire Intelligence community and the Administrative State it guards (badly) is justified by The Imperium of “Peace.”
Brussels is our puppet, we are the hand inside it and always were…
Apologies for having hurt your feelings re Mother Teresa.
And yes, I agree, Brussels is a US sock puppet. But as 80 percent or so of our German legislation meanwhile comes from there, that implies that we not only have to oust our government, but von der Leyen and her ilk, too. In which case, would the US stand idly by?
Yes. The US you’re worried about will, the US is consumed with internal combustion, er affairs.
the destructive model is this one: https://psychologicalquotes.substack.com/p/andrew-lobaczewski-macrosocial-theoretical
similar idea of "phases": https://psychologicalquotes.substack.com/p/sebastian-haffner-eng
the German soul: https://luctalks.substack.com/p/the-german-soul
:) Bless you! Mut