"more freedom dare!" - Spending that is the motto that Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) at the start of their first term period of 2005. There is a strong, meaningful slogan. Not only is it a liberal on economic theory, the idea of self-regulating, yet dynamic and evolving markets recurrent understanding of the economy is. Not only that this is the promise of a regulatory policy on limited economic Concept includes the guarantee of maximum, respectively entrepreneurial freedom. Because this is according to the liberal theory, the central pre-condition that the economy prospers. Everything is still there and in terms of the Society for reserved public regula-tation, manipulation and control, that is, for reliance on that ownership, personal development opportunities and fairness lead to social prosperity.
It is therefore a challenging theme, when it is precise. There is also a risky motto because it assumes freedom actually effecting all this, at least for the economic sphere, the financial market and economic crisis revealed that the "liberty concept" obviously not in reality rises. On the contrary, more than ever doubt the thesis have been expressed and applied, it is sufficient to rely on the self-regulating market forces - what was the reason for the renaissance of Keynesian stimulus, which appears in the meantime, however, lack of sustained success to be passed also . Not only that, but the question of whether they exist, these self-regulatory forces of the market, the great liberal economist Adam Smith to the metaphor of the "invisible hand" that organizes the market and can prosper, transcribed, have to be liberal economists like. But this applies especially to those parties and politicians who rely on it and call for the "freedom" concept-oriented economic, industrial and financial policy and follow.
It relates in particular Germany, therefore the current government parties CDU / CSU and FDP - with the FDP with the concept of freedom even in the name. These parties identify and define themselves very much about the concept of freedom. And it becomes clear how close success and failure of these parties with the liberal approach is actually connected - more, in times of economic crisis. That this concept since the financial crisis was put into question and so much discredited, these parties shall therefore the core. It is about their identity and the strong links the identity to the concept of freedom, the liberal economic theory, proves to be fatal. The search for a different, promising political, or at least economic policy concept is negated out of fear of identity loss, fear of loss of cohesion of each party.
That it is so is clear at least since the time of North Rhine-Westphalian Prime Minister Jürgen Rüttgers (CDU) in the summer of 2006 triggered "life-lies" debate, which concerned the future Course of the CDU went. Ruettgers called for a departure from the liberal course and had this with examples of liberal "life-lies" of his party supported . For example, he challenged the common assertion of his Liberal Party, working in Germany is too expensive. He also asked based out of empirical evidence that tax cuts not automatically lead to more Investititionen and thus lead to new jobs - a central hypothesis of the liberal economic wing of the CDU, but also the FDP, which is exactly their vehement call for tax cuts to relates.
Rüttgers was addressed to his party for the claim to to separate from liberal life lies, the economic wing of the CDU, but also by economists from the neo-liberal camp, associations sharply attacked. Among other sat the then CDU general secretary Ronald Pofalla vehemently for the concept of freedom and the maintenance of the liberal course. "more freedom dare!" - That was his conclusion . In choosing the CDU's Vice-Presidents in late 2006 Rüttgers was punished. Only slightly more than the necessary number of votes he received at the party and from then on, the "life-lies" debate of the CDU relabeled in a debate on the social policy of the party enrichment course.
The chance to break away from the party bound to endanger the "freedom" concept which would not automatically give up the goal of freedom was lost. The problem is not solved, it was displaced. This requires the party is once again in dangerous waters fall - triggered by the controversy over "Stuttgart 21" and the associated swelling chain of events. The CDU has become, this seems still not fully aware of to be. Until a few days anyway "Stuttgart 21" as a national policy and especially on Baden-Württemberg limited problem perceived and treated. There may be quite different: could soon be able old dispute over the course of the party break out again.
It is ironic that the CDU - if you "Stuttgart 21" as the trigger looks - not placed in dangerous waters, because they are its policies under the Freedom concept aligns although Rüttgers noted in 2006 on the fundamental weaknesses and it can be considered no later than summer 2007, the beginning of the financial crisis, only a very limited extent as an effective solution concept. Although the German economy is currently seem quite as solid, with signs of a sustained slight upturn. But this is far from secure. For the high dependence on exports, the German economy highly vulnerable to economic fluctuations in other countries. Breaks a world economy, in Germany the most severely affected. And in this respect, it seems questionable for a number of regions. Above all this applies to the United States, which threatens once again slipping into recession, but as for Japan and Britain - to say nothing of China and the still highly volatile financial markets altogether.
What the CDU would have placed on the slippery slope is that they are visible since the beginning of the black-yellow government pursued a policy term and sold as freedom, which is difficult to reconcile with the concept of freedom.
The first prominent example was the billion-dollar Tax incentives for hoteliers that were common with a number of other measures as a "future investment" and as a means of "growth acceleration" are praised. In the course of the dispute came to this package of measures - early 2010 - the first time the accusation that the administration is operating "political patronage" . He was primarily directed to the address of the FDP, which had let itself entitle the basis of their close ties to the lobby of the hotel owners and because of high donations from this direction as "Mövenpick-party."
Then came the sponsorship affair, before the state election in North Rhine-Westphalia CDU Jürgen Rüttgers made to create and exposing them to the suspect to "buy" from the economy to have. Rüttgers CDU was punished at the polls and ultimately revoked.
came in recent weeks, several significant cases of flagrant interference by business lobbyists on the policies to the surface, in particular the following:
Once this was the nuclear agreement , which the Federal Government with the four major energy companies regarding the conditions for the prolongation of the transit times of nuclear power plants closed. He clearly bears the signature of the corporations. because he provides them not only Despite fuel tax and special levy additional voluntary high additional profits . Rather than corresponding amendments to the Atomic Energy Act once lowered safety standards for reactors significantly, which means a considerable cost reduction for the power plant operators. At the same time should also be the legal standing of citizens be restricted. Finally, the nuclear agreement, the companies also ensures the event of a policy change from . If a new government review the decision to extend the maturities, so the companies grow from no penalty.
Second, there were parts of the health concept that has been designed apparently for the benefit of specific interest groups , but especially regulations in the field of health policy, the passages were taken over by the templates of lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry . The latter give the drug companies not only have considerable discretion, but also ensure high profits for the future even if this is the innovativeness respectively, the benefits of drugs developed by them is not justified. After early 2010, already the head of the charge of the proving Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Peter Sawicki, in principle, probably had to go because his task from the perspective of the pharmaceutical companies to seriously and sham innovations sorted consistently have now introduced with strong support from lobbyists amendments to the Medicines Act . Therefore should no longer be including the Federal Joint Committee consisting of cash and doctors, but the Health Ministry to be influenced more easily set in an ordinance, the criteria for assessing the benefits of new drugs. Furthermore, no distinction is between more decisive for the approval and effectiveness of the medical benefits of new medicines be allowed. With the admission of a benefit as a result the future is assumed. The burden of proof of the benefits of new drugs is reversed. It is therefore no longer at pharmaceutical manufacturers. That is, the prescription of newly approved drugs to the competent Federal Joint Committee may be different than previously restricted or excluded only then if their unsuitability is demonstrated.
It is not surprising that the new health policy but as a liberal logic of the following product is presented. Justified the changes here are mainly to the aging population, to relieve the costly progress and the need to domestic companies for reasons of international competition for health services, and to 'liberate'. In an editorial in Handelsblatt online these arguments have been a few weeks ago Interestingly, once analyzed, and ultimately refuted conclusively. The article was entitled "The lies of the life Philipp Rösler" .
addition to these new cases of pork-barrel politics, the debate about Hartz IV added yet that stirs since the beginning of the year, the citizens and the government to accusations of social coldness and, above all, the unspeakable, its policy kindness regarding the distribution of has placed burdens on bank rescue and stimulus packages. Here again, the front-Gründig to liberal positions.
And finally, "Stuttgart 21". For months, will be fought with ever-greater participation of citizens around the train station project. As Baden-Württemberg-ruled by black is yellow and because of the pre-history , this case classified under the federal levels, in seamlessly in a certain way. In all cases, there are political decisions and measures that are ostensibly based on the concept of freedom and thus more and more people, especially in the case of "Stuttgart 21", the slogan "More freedom dare!" be measured.
The authoritarian presence of the Baden-Württemberg CDU Minister-President Stefan-undersecretary of the dispute over "Stuttgart 21" is likely why many people have confused for weeks. Since the controversial police operational on 30 September against peaceful demonstrators, including many students and the elderly, with water cannons, batons and pepper spray is, in many citizens across Germany irritation turned to anger. A party who "dare more freedom" for the promise been elected by them and are not applied now for all to see Not physical force has to enforce its will against the people - that does not fit together, something is broken.
And so the CDU gets a whole are increasingly in disrepute, because more and more people become aware that their motto is not fair at all. Their policy is not perceived as one of freedom, respectively to prevent forced targeted. It is also not perceived as being directed to the common good. Instead, many see again and again that tough-specific interests to be served, to the detriment and expense of the public.
And how do the leading CDU politician that?
Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) warned recently on the country s Day of the Young Union Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in the debate about "Stuttgart 21" an ever greater divergence between individual and overall interests : "If we do not manage to bring local and overall economic interests zusammenzu, then this country is not changed," she was quoted as saying. Individuals must be willing to take with regard to the Community disadvantages. "If one thinks only of himself and not to future generations, that is a problem for our country." Germany had every chance in the future, "said Merkel. "But with the barriers against any change will be nothing."
Stefan Mappus (CDU), Minister President of Baden-Württemberg said the debate about "Stuttgart 21" in the face of continuing protests and the rise of the Greens in the polls of public opinion research institutes recently the choice of direction for Germany . Foreign companies were surprised by the controversy over the construction project, German companies shocking part. The Prime Minister said he wanted "a discourse in this country, what is still possible." Germany should consider beyond Suttgart 21, where it would develop.
One can certainly understand this: citizens, not support their freedom of thought marked by ostensibly political decisions, but to defend themselves against their individual concerns beyond the public good and harming the sustainability of Germany. Arguments do not matter.
Not the CDU thus makes a mistake, but the citizens know their ideas on freedom of directed policy not to appreciate.
The "life-lies" debate, the CDU has obviously caught up with - albeit this time in another sense. It is almost a "life-lies" debate 2.0. For now, the concept of freedom has been thrown completely overboard and not to see some concept in the government's action is, is staunchly defended the last thing the identification of core still represents the party and to guarantee its coherence: the Liberty label that the government action was imposed.
It may Liberals in the CDU, in 2006 the "life-lies" debate ultimately stifled do not like it, but Jürgen Rüttgers was right to launch the debate about the foundation and the course of the party. The encroaching on the world financial crisis and after the Lehman bankruptcy in the fall of 2008 breaking in world economic crisis, both of which are not overcome until now, demonstrating that the concept of freedom is no longer with. Now, the CDU is no alternative, because without having a plan. It is little consolation that the SPD is not too much other way. It is fatal, should the economy deteriorate again. "Stuttgart 21" is perhaps the suddenly chic salsfrage for the CDU has become. For what it is yet, when the Liberty label falls within the capital of the Swabia country?
addition recommended articles:
- Forsa data: coalition collapsed in survey on all-time low (v. 13:10:10)
- clamp communities: citizens in 2011 threatens unprecedented fees shock (v. 18:10:10)
- Lower Taxes: Corporations do not participate in budget consolidation (V. 18:10:10)
- Stuttgart-21-Protest: De Maizière wedged against "wealthy parents" (v. 19:10:10).
- clamp communities: citizens in 2011 threatens unprecedented fees shock (v. 18:10:10)
- Lower Taxes: Corporations do not participate in budget consolidation (V. 18:10:10)
- Stuttgart-21-Protest: De Maizière wedged against "wealthy parents" (v. 19:10:10).
0 comments:
Post a Comment