This is the counter 'Scholz offers strong rebuke to JD Vance, reaffirms support for Ukraine' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV3IXCsriek

This is the counter 'Scholz offers strong rebuke to JD Vance, reaffirms support for Ukraine' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV3IXCsriek

To me this is not a "strong rebuke."

IIRC then JD Vance actually didn't even mention Germany's limitation towards free speech when it comes to denying the Holocaust, which is how Scholz answers to his criticism.

In fact, Scholz acts exactly as Vance describes: He's completely clueless or intentionally ignorant about the international-online narrative of a weakening Germany. He's clueless that our transatlantic partners are pissed at us because we keep on trying to weaken their national interests (e.g. tech companies).

Briefly mentioning it in the first minutes of his speech, Scholz sees the lesson from Germany's Third Reich as a mandate to avoid repeating it, at all costs. I can agree with that.

Frankly though, I also agree with everything that Vance said. And I actually think our German politicians ought to react through acknowledgment of the criticism, not by being defensive.

Them reacting defensively or offendedly is, in my eyes, just embarrassing.

That is because I've been reacting like this to the Vance criticism already years ago, on social media. The narrative has now just climbed the media latter and so it is Scholz who has to answer it today. He'll lose dialectically to it as well. It'll just be a matter of time.

To me Scholz and others' reaction is embarrassing because I have already moved on from my stubborn German posture of insisting to consider myself geopolitically influential. We have such bad internal issues, it isn't wise to focus on the external (Vance's point too).

In my political understanding, I have already made concessions to the American accusations. They have a core of truth to them and they have to be taken seriously. We are, in my opinion, not in a position to push back on them.

Psychologically, Scholz and Pistorius's defensive reaction is not gesture of strength or independence. Their un-preparedness with regard to Vance's speech also shows their party's incompetence and delusion. You can see that they weren't prepared for it. They've just prefixed their actual speech with a few words of reaction. In fact, that we're caught with out pants down yet again, that's maybe fundamental to the issue. Meanwhile, I even agree with Scholz's position on Ukraine: But the way to strength is through close partnership with the US. Not by splitting apart.

Ukraine, which is probably going to get a peace deal through the US [5], because the US and its people have understood that Realpolitik and geopolitical anarchism is the most accurate model of interstate security competition. Vance is a US veteran, not a career politician like Scholz.

I'm frankly also sick of our social-democrat German politicians idealizing foreign policy.

Be that when the Syrian warlord refuses to shake our female minister's hand and we react with outrage, or when we overload the conflict in Ukraine with a false expectation of fairness/righteousness. War is a conflict about lines on maps. Accepting further costs will move them.

All I can say is that gladly Scholz's SDP is going to get between 10-15% in next week's election [1].

I can't wait for them to leave this government, it's been a disaster.

I'm, however, honestly also sad that the German people won't get their will enacted in Germany, and maybe this also goes to the core of Vance's criticism. Namely that it is unwise to be afraid of the own country's voters.

All German establishment parties have sworn to not coalise with the AFD. That's why Polymarket sees a coalition between CDU and SPD as the most likely outcome [2].

But if the AFD is going to get the projected 20-25% [3], and the CDU gets the projected 30-35% [4], then I think what Vance warned is going to happen. Namely, we'll then get a center (CDU) left (SDP) coalition despite the majority of Germans having voted center (CDU) right (AFD).

Yes, the AFD's posturing might not be acceptable to an upper case Democrat. I also have my doubts. But this is what the people will vote for and it simply doesn't matter whether the political aristocracy deems them to be noble enough to rule the country.

Vance said that European politicians are too scared to let the will of the people happen. And he is right.

1: https://polymarket.com/event/spd-of-vote-in-german-election?tid=1739630679610

2: https://polymarket.com/event/which-coalition-will-form-the-next-german-government?tid=1739630762001

3: https://polymarket.com/event/afd-of-vote-in-german-election?tid=1739630880523

4: https://polymarket.com/event/cducsu-of-vote-in-german-election?tid=1739630921827

5: https://polymarket.com/event/trump-wins-ends-ukraine-war-in-90-days?tid=1739631491380

This post should be declared *FUD*, simply because it repeats propaganda. I'm not a fan of the previous, current (and probably not the next) government of Germany, but justifying the blatant US support for the AfD is a bit much.

I can understand the discontent with the current political situation in Germany. There are more than 40 parties competing for the next Bundestag, but many voters seem to care for only a few of them, and then complain about the lack of choice.

So the rage expressed is somewhat understandable, but repeating obvious political lies is not. Two examples:

Namely, we'll then get a center (CDU) left (SDP) coalition despite the majority of Germans having voted center (CDU) right (AFD).

It constructs a majority where there is none. Current polls estimate the intersection between CDU and AFD at less than 20-30% (of their followers). Just adding the shares of both, despite their differences, is a bit daft.

Vance is a US veteran, not a career politician like Scholz.

During his time in the Marines, Vance was a public affairs officer and spent six months in Iraq but did not see combat ??? What is the difference?

I‘d rather have two dominant parties than what we have. At least in the US the people actually get what they‘ve voted for, even if it is extreme.

Instead in Germany, as you say as well, there isn‘t even a choice. If a majority of the people vote right, we might end up getting a center left government because there are some non-process enshrined rules around how to treat the AFD when it comes to governing? Not how I think democracy ought to work.

Even if the AFD and the CDU have few in common. So what? This is what the people are going to vote for, so are they going to deny the people‘s vote because of some party-internal reasons? To me this doesn‘t sound like representation.

I don‘t think the Vance speech is Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt. We ARE already policing „bad jokes“ with a 4000 EUR fine.

The government worker even says in the above video: „It‘s even worse to do it on the internet, because it doesn‘t go away.“ I don‘t think this is generalizable, but oh well, unelected government employees making conclusions…

If one believes the left, then this is all some kind of coup of Elon and Trump to turn the world into the Third Reich.

But what if they‘re actually well intentioned?

And what if Vance is just warning of the dangers of policing speech in an age of LLMs?

This bureaucracy that you see there: People who print out the internet. What‘s going to happen when this digitizes, becomes effective and when they can go through each of our profiles on social media? An LLM will only cost cents to analyze years worth of content to analyze whether you Rainer have posted some questionable texts!

I don‘t know why we keep pushing back against our greatest ally because of some „Trump is Hitler“ psyop.

Instead in Germany, as you say as well, there isn‘t even a choice

That I didn’t say. There are 40+ parties, and there might be new ideas amongst them, but only few people seem interested enough to look at proposals off the mainstream. Rather anxious not „to loose their vote“, or by just being lazy, the majority elects the same increasingly thought- and lifeless political parties. So, they could have the choice.

Even if the AFD and the CDU have few in common. So what? This is what the people are going to vote for, so are they going to deny the people‘s vote because of some party-internal reasons? To me this doesn‘t sound like representation.

I don’t think votes are denied here. People know the CDU position, it has been discussed enough, I think. So, if the voters wanted the AfD, they simply could vote for them. Sorry, sounds too much like a [ Dolchstoßlegende (Stab-in-the-back myth)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth).

Personally, I think that pairing the *Kanzlerwahlverein* with a rage—driven AfD will not help in finding an intelligent solution in the near future. They both are not known for forward-looking thinking.

But what if they‘re actually well intentioned?

That sounds a lot like [Peter Thiel's characterization of them as the Star Wars rebels](https://news.kiwistand.com/stories/Peter-Thiel-and-the-Triumph-of-the-Counter-Elites-(podcast)?index=0x673755104ba67440427df5c93d62b1eb9bcaa65cd5f7d48ab2f3ccd336c43e3fbaf71c1c), but due their posturing, sheer might and financial prowess they remind many more of [Senator Palpatine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palpatine). Hard to believe in good intentions there.

That I didn’t say. There are 40+ parties, and there might be new ideas amongst them, but only few people seem interested enough to look at proposals off the mainstream. Rather anxious not „to loose their vote“, or by just being lazy, the majority elects the same increasingly thought- and lifeless political parties.

The issue is that there seems to be no coordination capacity around electing parties that could replace the establishment parties but aren't fascist. In part this is also because the center left establishment parties are all arguing that "democracy is on the ballot," which is a questionable claim at best.

Not even more economically right parties like the FDP might make it into the government. It's a left-right race here.

Meanwhile Lindner from the FDP is the only candidate that has said that publicly that humility would have been a great response to Vance's speech (my opinion too). He also condemned Scholz's Alleingang with respect to pushing back against the American criticism just one week before the election. The irony is that there's only a 36% chance of the FDP crossing the 5% limit [1].

Hard to believe in good intentions there.

Yes having faith is very hard. Especially when so much is at stake.

Common sense can help to re-establish faith. I've not listened to a single podcast with any of these people where I didn't get the impression that they were all somewhat reasonable and had interesting ideas etc. They might get some of the subjects wrong etc. But I never perceived them as fundamentally evil.

It's just now that all of it is politically overloaded that we get these crazy caricatures of their apparent intentions.

I have read all texts of Peter Thiel, for a decade, and I actually do think he's a well intentioned and really smart guy. I think he gets falsely demonized by those who are his political opponents. I tend to think everyone who's demonizing Thiel happens to also be a piece of shit politically.

Elon is a special character and I have more doubts about him, but he too has achieved and done things that have inspired me. I reject to villainize him, this doesn't make sense to me purely based on my gut feeling. Yes, this is based on faith and trust

1: https://polymarket.com/event/fdp-wins-5-or-more-of-vote-in-german-election?tid=1739877612600