{"id":97651,"date":"2016-05-30T07:48:19","date_gmt":"2016-05-30T15:48:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=97651"},"modified":"2016-05-30T08:05:42","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T16:05:42","slug":"steve-sailer-the-growing-menace-posed-by-lawless-anti-democratic-autocracy-in-central-europe","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=97651","title":{"rendered":"Steve Sailer: The Growing Menace Posed by Lawless, Anti-democratic Autocracy in Central Europe"},"content":{"rendered":"

Steve Sailer writes<\/a>: A couple of weeks ago in Taki’s Magazine<\/em><\/a>, I recounted commenter Sean’s theory that the German Chancellor’s 2015 whim to open the gates of Europe was part of a coherent plan to weaken European opposition to united Germany’s New Order in Europe by positioning Germany not as the scary hegemon it objectively is, but as a moral superpower, Sweden writ large.<\/p>\n

In the London Review of Books <\/em>back in March, a top German academic offered a similar analysis:<\/p>\n

\n

Scenario for a Wonderful Tomorrow<\/a>
\nWolfgang Streeck<\/p>\n

Wolfgang Streeck<\/a> is director emeritus at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne. His next book, <\/em>How Will Capitalism End?, is due to be published by Verso in September.<\/em><\/p>\n

Europe\u2019s Orphan: The Future of the Euro and the Politics of Debt<\/em> by Martin Sandbu
\nPrinceton, 336 pp, \u00a319.95, September 2015, ISBN 978 0 691 16830 2<\/p>\n

Europe is falling apart, destroyed by its most devoted fans, the Germans. In the summer of 2015, having humiliated the Greeks by forcing another reform diktat down their throats, Angela Merkel started a new game, aimed at diverting attention from the economic and political disaster monetary union had become. …<\/p>\n

Last year, the refugee crisis offered Merkel another opportunity to demonstrate just how fast she can change tack. Once again, media coverage influenced her decision-making, just as it would a few months later when smartphone videos of the New Year\u2019s Eve riot at Cologne Central Station triggered another 180 degree turn in her policies. In July a PR event, part of a government campaign to encourage cabinet members to meet ordinary citizens and listen to their ideas, went wrong. One of the young people invited to take part in a \u2018dialogue\u2019 with Merkel on the environment, the 14-year-old daughter of Palestinian asylum seekers, unexpectedly complained in front of the TV cameras that her family, who had been living in Germany for four years, might be sent back to the Lebanon at any moment. She asked, in flawless German, why she wasn\u2019t allowed to stay in Germany \u2018to enjoy life like everybody else\u2019. Merkel said something like, \u2018we cannot take in everyone, much as we might want to.\u2019 The girl began to cry. Not knowing what to do, Merkel started patting the child\u2019s head with a helpless expression on her face. The result was widespread outrage on social media. A few months later, the authorities told the girl\u2019s family that they could stay in Germany for at least another year.<\/p>\n

The elite was persuaded that the German public would never put up with images like those of the Jungle in Calais. Day after day the media, whipped into a frenzy by Facebook and Twitter, accused France and Britain of callously denying migrants\u2019 human rights. Then, in September, the publication of the photograph of the dead Syrian child, Alan Kurdi, forced political leaders worldwide into hectic if symbolic activity. Among Germans it was widely believed that the boy\u2019s death was the fault of \u2018Europe\u2019 as a whole, including Germany. Meanwhile, refugees had been gathering in increasing numbers at Budapest\u2019s central station, which produced another set of powerful images; most of those refugees seemed to be heading for Germany.<\/p>\n

A master politician like Merkel will never let a good crisis go to waste. It wasn\u2019t just media stories about suffering migrants that led her to invite the refugees in Budapest to come to Germany, no papers required and no questions asked. What Merkel called \u2018showing a friendly face in an emergency\u2019 was meant to shame those who, during the euro crisis, had enjoyed the cartoons of Merkel and her finance minister, Wolfgang Sch\u00e4uble, in Nazi uniform. By opening the German border while the French and British borders remained closed, Merkel could hope to recapture the moral high ground occupied for so long by those accusing the German government of sado-monetarism, or worse.<\/p>\n

Another factor was the tight labour market that German employers, still Merkel\u2019s main constituency, were facing, especially after the introduction of a statutory minimum wage was forced on Merkel by her coalition partner, the SPD. Rumours spread in the German press that Syrian refugees in particular, many of them allegedly with degrees in engineering and medicine, had all manner of skills. German economic research institutes predicted a new Wirtschaftswunder, while employers promised to invest heavily in training the presumably tiny number of less skilled immigrants. Everybody assumed that most if not all the refugees and asylum seekers \u2013 a distinction soon lost in the general excitement \u2013 would stay in Germany for a long time if not for good. For Merkel, who in October 2010 claimed that \u2018the multikulti approach [had] failed, absolutely failed,\u2019 this was no longer a problem. In fact, it had become a solution: in the first half of 2015, several studies indicated that the expensive measures taken over a decade of Merkel rule to induce German families to have more children had had next to no effect. Early that summer, to avert what was perceived as a looming demographic crisis, Merkel got her closest aides to test the mood in the party and among the general public on immigration legislation, but was met with firm resistance.<\/p>\n

Budapest was what the ancient Greeks called a kairos<\/em> \u2013 a lucky moment when a number of birds were positioned in such a way that they could be killed with one stone. Politics, as always with Merkel, trumped policies. \u2018Showing a friendly face\u2019 would make it possible for the Greens at the next election in 2017 to do what their leadership has long wanted to do but never dared: enter into a coalition government with the Christian Democrats. Merkel acted exactly as she did on neoliberal reform in 2005 and nuclear energy in 2011: quickly, on her own, and without wasting time explaining herself. … she counted on the opposition parties in the Bundestag \u2013 Linkspartei and the Greens \u2013 not to ask awkward questions, and they obliged. The members of her party couldn\u2019t complain: they had been backed into a corner by the SPD\u2019s approval of Merkel\u2019s stance, and by their desire not to damage their leader. Once again, a decision \u2018that will change our country\u2019, as Merkel herself put it, was made without regard for democratic process or, for that matter, constitutional formalities. When Merkel declared the German borders open, there had been no cabinet decision to this effect and no official statement in the Bundestag. Since the opposition didn\u2019t ask, as Merkel knew they wouldn\u2019t, nobody knows to this day what sort of order, legal or not, by whom and when, was given to the police. The Interior Ministry is still refusing requests from leading figures (including the former president of the constitutional court, who was preparing a legal opinion on the matter for the Bavarian government) for access to the ministerial decree that should have been issued to the border authorities.<\/p>\n

There were good reasons for asking questions. The refugees, more than a million of them, who arrived in Germany in 2015, all arrived from safe third countries. Under German and European law, they had to register in the country where they entered the European Union, and then wait to be assigned a legal residence in a member state. Merkel seems to have decided that she could safely ignore all this. When anyone complained that this was both a huge stress test on German society and a giant social engineering project, Merkel regally announced that if she had to apologise for \u2018showing a friendly face\u2019, \u2018then this is not my country\u2019 \u2013 an extraordinary statement for a democratically elected leader to make. In fact, as the Energiewende<\/em> demonstrated, she has for some time been governing not like a parliamentary leader but like a president with emergency powers. For some time, inquiries into the wisdom of her immigration policy were answered by her entourage \u2013 which in this case included all the Bundestag parties \u2013 by claiming that the mere expression of dissent \u2018played into the hands of the right\u2019, a potent rhetorical device in Germany. Until Cologne, concern over the government\u2019s handling of the refugee crisis was effectively suppressed.<\/p>\n

Between September and January, Merkel\u2019s minister of the interior was left out of the loop as Merkel governed directly, using staged public appearances \u2013 press conferences, talk shows and party conventions \u2013 to cultivate the support of those in German society who saw the influx of refugees as an opportunity to demonstrate to the world their country\u2019s new friendliness. Merkel did not shy away from Obama-style nationalist pathos, employing it in her annual summer press conference on 31 August, when she told her compatriots: \u2018Germany is a strong country \u2026 We did so many things, we can do that. We can do it, and where something gets in our way, it has to be overcome.\u2019 For six months she evaded all constitutional checks and balances, enjoying the praise showered on her by, among others, Time magazine, which made her Person of the Year 2015. She was talked about as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, and even Holocaust Remembrance Day on 27 January turned into a Merkelfest when the guest speaker in the Bundestag, an Austrian writer who survived the Holocaust, told her audience that \u2018this country, which eighty years ago was responsible for the worst crimes of the century, has today won the applause of the world, thanks to its open borders.\u2019<\/p>\n

What about Europe? And why dwell so long on the refugee crisis when I\u2019m supposed to be discussing a book on the euro crisis? The answer is that Merkel\u2019s immigration policy offers an object lesson in what other countries can expect from Germany acting European. Just as the United States sees the world as an extended playing field for its domestic political economy, Germany has come to consider the European Union as an extension of itself, where what is right for Germany is by definition right for all others. There is nothing particularly immoral about this; indeed Germans think it is supremely moral, as they identify their control of Europe with a post-nationalism understood as anti-nationalism, which in turn is understood as the quintessential lesson of German history. Very much like the US, German elites project what they collectively regard as self-evident, natural and reasonable onto their outside world, and are puzzled that anyone could possibly fail to see things the way they do. Perhaps the dissenters suffer from cognitive deficits and require education by Sch\u00e4uble in the Eurogroup classroom?<\/p>\n

One problem with hegemonic self-righteousness is that it prevents the self-righteous from seeing that what they consider morally self-evident is informed by self-interest. The self-interest of German export industries, for example, underlies Germany\u2019s identification of the \u2018European idea\u2019 with the single European currency. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the national interest that is mistakenly seen as identical to the interest of all reasonable human beings, in Europe and beyond, is necessarily shaped by the political interest of the government and its dominant social bloc in preserving their power. This puts peripheral countries at the mercy of the national power games and the moral and semantic ethnocentrisms of countries at the centre, which are hard to decipher for outsiders \u2013 especially with a postmodern leader like Merkel who, free from substantive commitments and constitutional constraints, has perfected the art of staying in power by means of unpredictable changes of course.<\/p>\n

As the refugee crisis unfolded, Europe was dragged into the complicated twists and turns of German domestic politics. Merkel early on informed an astonished German public that controlling national borders had become \u2018impossible in the 21st century\u2019, and backed this up by aggressively criticising the Hungarian government for preparing to close its borders. After Cologne, of course, the closing of borders suddenly became possible again, and Hungary re-emerged as a model for the rest of Europe, in particular for Greece, which was threatened by Germany with exclusion from the Schengen area if it didn\u2019t seal its borders. German law forbids, or is said by the German government to forbid, sending would-be immigrants away once they have expressed a desire to apply for asylum. So Merkel had to get the Greeks, and Europe as a whole, to observe this principle, lest her German pro-immigration constituency smelled the rat that was heading in its direction. The burden of keeping the migrants out of Europe fell on Turkey, which was supposed to put an end to the illegal trafficking of migrants to Greece \u2013 on a country, that is, whose human rights record suggests it may not be particularly careful when dealing with Syrian or any other refugees. Of course, Turkish co-operation had a price, and though Merkel had in the past steadfastly opposed the country\u2019s bid for EU membership, now, having changed tack again and speaking on behalf of Europe as a whole, she promised Erdo\u011fan expedited negotiations on accession as a reward for preventing the Syrian refugees she had invited to enter Germany from entering Greece. …<\/p>\n

So immigration once again became \u2018Europeanised\u2019 while Europe became more \u2018Germanised\u2019 than ever. Merkel\u2019s highest priority is to avoid having to close the German border, as Denmark and Sweden have closed theirs: closed borders make for ugly pictures, and they also make German voters wonder whether it\u2019s worth paying for Europe if they have to stop at the border when they go on holiday. Moreover, German businesses have begun claiming that the end of Schengen would cost billions of euros because of time lost at Europe\u2019s internal borders, as well as tens of thousands of jobs. Even so, the German public had to be given a reason to believe that the number of immigrants coming to Germany is going to drop. EU member states must therefore agree to take a share of the immigrants invited by Germany, even though they weren\u2019t consulted before Merkel made her offer. The number of migrants can have no upper limit, or Obergrenze, a term that Merkel\u2019s PR machine has declared anathema, and that has consequently become a signifier in German public discourse of Fremdenfeindlichkeit (xenophobia, if not racism). It\u2019s difficult, however, for member countries to commit to letting in a defined proportion of an undefined total number of migrants. So Visegr\u00e1d-bashing \u2013 Visegr\u00e1d representing the alliance of four Central European countries, the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary \u2013 followed Hungary-bashing, and German politicians started threatening Poland, of all countries, with financial punishment unless it fell in line with German-style \u2018European solidarity\u2019. …<\/p>\n

The result of all the equivocation, double-talk and Merkelspeak, this difficult-to-disentangle mix of self-interest and sentimentality, is an immense political and institutional mess caused by the imposition on Europe of German policies disguised as European policies to which, supposedly, there is no alternative. This includes a restructuring of the citizenry through immigration, not just in Germany where it might seem economically or demographically expedient, but also in other European countries where it definitely isn\u2019t. The result is rapidly rising anti-German sentiment in the form of anti-European sentiment, not only among political elites but also, most powerfully, among the electorate.<\/p>\n

… The new \u2018European question\u2019 is whether the only way to protect Europe from the antics of a German chancellor and her increasingly personal rule is to dismantle centralised European regulations like Dublin and Schengen, along with the euro.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n