I mean . . it should be pretty clear to everyone that international capital is driving the bus everywhere in the West, and has been since the 70s at least.
Yea I was thinking the same while reading the article.
“A sober assessment of German policies shows a country not guided foremost by advancing liberal democratic values globally, but by an almost ideologically neutral pursuit of its commercial interests...”
Is there a single country in “the west” that that this isn’t true of?
That doesn't make it right. More criticism along these lines should have appeared in the media. When it comes to China, these policies are also short-sighted. China is not just any country, it is the principal strategic competitor to the West. China conquered a free city in contravention to international treaties that it signed and now is probably planning to invade another free country. Leaders who pander to such things do not deserve to be respected. They are greedy as well as short-sighted. A country like Germany does not deserve the security protection of NATO because they are not a team player, they are free riders. They should be forced to pay for their own defence.
Never said it made it right. Just think it’s naive to point that out as if it makes Germany some sort of outlier. We should be starting from the understanding that this applies to pretty much every country on earth. By the way, the US violates international law on a regular basis and without hesitation. To hold up other countries to standards we don’t hold ourselves up to is childish imho. Amnesty international just released their human rights report for every country on earth, I suggest checking it out.
Let's talk about rational, enlightened self interest, leaving moral standards for a while. Germany's attitude of cosying up to China is not just morally condemnable and evil, it is also strategically counterproductive and foolish. China is not just a powerful country, it is one of the major threats to the international system. What happened in Hong Kong is not just a moral issue, it is an act of aggression against a free city. Why should the US let a country like Germany benefit from NATO protection while they strike relationships with China and Russia? They pretend (Merkel even said it) that they are equidistant from China and US. Then let them be! Why are they in a Western led alliance if they think the world has equally to fear from China and the US? It is an astoundingly foolish view of the world from a Western liberal democracy. Germany is probably alone among the major NATO countries in not raising their defence expenditures to 2% of GDP. France, UK, Australia all major NATO allies of the US have significantly hiked defence expenditures in recent years, not Germany.
This gets back to the original comment in this this thread though. Isn’t “Germany’s attitude of cosying up to China” an inevitable result of international capital’s attitude of cosying up to China? You say “China is one of the major threats to the international system.” I’d argue that, as the original commenter stated, that international capital is driving the bus. International capital’s interest align with the interest of the Chinese government. If you want to make outward aggression toward China a requirement for NATO membership, you’d be left with no NATO.
If "international capital" and its interests were the highest values that people cared about in liberal democracies of the West and they cared about it to an extent that they were indifferent to everything else, then this would make sense. Otherwise this attitude of outsourcing policy on all issues to Wall Street (or big business etc) is dangerous and should be fought by citizens.
Not aggression, understanding and preparation. Other countries are willing to take security threats more seriously than Germany. Germany is an outlier, to some extent even within NATO.
I mean . . it should be pretty clear to everyone that international capital is driving the bus everywhere in the West, and has been since the 70s at least.
Yea I was thinking the same while reading the article.
“A sober assessment of German policies shows a country not guided foremost by advancing liberal democratic values globally, but by an almost ideologically neutral pursuit of its commercial interests...”
Is there a single country in “the west” that that this isn’t true of?
That doesn't make it right. More criticism along these lines should have appeared in the media. When it comes to China, these policies are also short-sighted. China is not just any country, it is the principal strategic competitor to the West. China conquered a free city in contravention to international treaties that it signed and now is probably planning to invade another free country. Leaders who pander to such things do not deserve to be respected. They are greedy as well as short-sighted. A country like Germany does not deserve the security protection of NATO because they are not a team player, they are free riders. They should be forced to pay for their own defence.
Never said it made it right. Just think it’s naive to point that out as if it makes Germany some sort of outlier. We should be starting from the understanding that this applies to pretty much every country on earth. By the way, the US violates international law on a regular basis and without hesitation. To hold up other countries to standards we don’t hold ourselves up to is childish imho. Amnesty international just released their human rights report for every country on earth, I suggest checking it out.
Let's talk about rational, enlightened self interest, leaving moral standards for a while. Germany's attitude of cosying up to China is not just morally condemnable and evil, it is also strategically counterproductive and foolish. China is not just a powerful country, it is one of the major threats to the international system. What happened in Hong Kong is not just a moral issue, it is an act of aggression against a free city. Why should the US let a country like Germany benefit from NATO protection while they strike relationships with China and Russia? They pretend (Merkel even said it) that they are equidistant from China and US. Then let them be! Why are they in a Western led alliance if they think the world has equally to fear from China and the US? It is an astoundingly foolish view of the world from a Western liberal democracy. Germany is probably alone among the major NATO countries in not raising their defence expenditures to 2% of GDP. France, UK, Australia all major NATO allies of the US have significantly hiked defence expenditures in recent years, not Germany.
This gets back to the original comment in this this thread though. Isn’t “Germany’s attitude of cosying up to China” an inevitable result of international capital’s attitude of cosying up to China? You say “China is one of the major threats to the international system.” I’d argue that, as the original commenter stated, that international capital is driving the bus. International capital’s interest align with the interest of the Chinese government. If you want to make outward aggression toward China a requirement for NATO membership, you’d be left with no NATO.
If "international capital" and its interests were the highest values that people cared about in liberal democracies of the West and they cared about it to an extent that they were indifferent to everything else, then this would make sense. Otherwise this attitude of outsourcing policy on all issues to Wall Street (or big business etc) is dangerous and should be fought by citizens.
Not aggression, understanding and preparation. Other countries are willing to take security threats more seriously than Germany. Germany is an outlier, to some extent even within NATO.