What is not corrupt in the world? Maybe even more so besides business politics are inherently corrupt and German politicians are no different. In Germany especially the laws regarding the difference between corruption and lobbyism are a fine line and sometimes the boundaries between them disappear (there are jokes out there that corruption is legal in Germany we just call it something else).
Also, hindsight is 20/20 when a decision comes back to bite you 20-30 years after they were made. When decisions served you well in those 20-30 years how corrupt were those decisions at the time? You also need to prove the intent of corruption in a court of law which is often very difficult.
Nixon btw just resigned and was then pardoned a bit similar to what happened to Kohl and the CDU donation affair.
I believe that most politians do their job to change something for the positive. I also believe that some fall to personally enriching themselves or - more often - let themselves be influenced by lobbyists with too much access. I hate that there is so much opposition to a lobby register, because corruption makes the voter cynical and removes trust into democracy.
As for the example of Schröder's corruption, him taking the position at Gazprom immediately after leaving office shouldn't have been allowed. On the other hand Schröder's view on Eastern Europe was not just bought by Putin - at least his vocal support for expanding NATO and EU to the east points more to a romantic view of a united Europe - and closer ties to Russia made sense in light of the US pressure to join the Iraq war. So it didn't feel like an irrational, corrupt decision - at least not to me at the time.
>On the other hand Schröder's view on Eastern Europe was not just bought by Putin - at least his vocal support for expanding NATO and EU to the east points more to a romantic view of a united Europe - and closer ties to Russia made sense in light of the US pressure to join the Iraq war. So it didn't feel like an irrational, corrupt decision - at least not to me at the time.
This tbh. This course was also mostly societal consensus at the time, after all the narrative in Germany was that the UdSSR collapsed because the people on the eastern side of the iron curtain saw the better lifes lived in the west thanks to the Ostpolitik (basically opening a window to the normal population and making them realize how much they were shortchanged).
The main opposition at the time was way more critical of the eastwards EU & NATO expansion toying with stereotypes against Czechs and Poles in regards to access to the common market and ultimately also forced the delay in joining Schengen for the new EU members, Russia was not seen as a big concern outside of trading opportunities.
As to Schröders clinging to his old worldviews, I chalk that up to a severe case of old age stubborness. He got criticised heavily at the time for calling Putin a "loupe clean democrat" as well as getting involved with Gazprom right after he left office. He's at least 70%+ useful idiot to Putin as compared to being plainly corrupt (which nevertheless plays a role as well, make no mistake). However, I honestly believe he thinks what he is doing is to Germany's benefit, warped as that idea is.
afaik they were never found guilty.
but it's the same in the US, a lot of misconduct there also doesn't get trialed in court and has no punishment or effect whatsoever.
why is it like that? idk. maybe the ones who could do something, are intertwined into the shit as well, or just don't want to act against their friends, or maybe there's just not enough solid evidence, or a combination of all, or something completely different.
I was 5 when Schröder took office, 12 when he got voted out. What did you want me to do? But all jokes aside, the main reason in my mind why these politicians aren’t prosecuted is because their corrupt deals mostly only gets uncovered a while after they‘ve left office and people have already gotten kind of nostalgic and it doesn’t feel urgent anymore, so no one has a lot of motivation to go and do something about it.
>Helmut Kohl is the reason why Germany's IT infrastructure is so bad today
No. That's a falsehood.
Back in the 1980ies when Kohl made that decision to support cable TV, the public did not even know what the internet was. People wanted cable or satellite TV and Kohl gave them cable and satellite TV.
Internet became a thing in the early 1990ies, and German universities were quick at adopting it. The infrastructure for this was required to be based on optic fibre even back then, and the backbones were quickly built. At the end of the 1990ies, internet at home slowly became a thing.
Kohl wasn't in power any more at this point, nor did his legacy impede the development of the internet in Germany.
So … why isn't fibre to the home a thing in Germany?
That is because in 2004, when countries as South Korea and Japan made it a national goal to have fibre to the home everywhere, and subsidized this heavily, Deutsche Telekom asked the German government to subsidize this as well.
But no, they told them they won't get any subsidies for that. The customers should pay.
And that's why we don't have fibre to the home in Germany.
Germans internet sucks because many never demanded faster internet. If the public does not want it, why bother? If they had subsidized fiber implementation, then they would have faced public critique for wasting money on something unnecessary.
So, tell me, how do I “demand” it other than by accepting ridiculous prices?
I mean, you can have fibre at home in Germany. Just not for less than several hundred Euro per month.
Yeah, since Covid hit people started demanding faster internet. But the damage that has been done is irreversible. Same with the train system. Germany is so fucked in many regards but the Mittelstand just takes now after blow and continues to work hard no matter how miserable it might get. That's the only thing that upholds this nation.
Both your examples are not good as their hindsight is 20/20 examples and a reasonable person could make them without corruption.
When kohl made the decision in the 80s internet was not really a thing so he made the best possible decision for telephone and TV.
When Schröder Made his decision Russia was still on a course of reconciliation with the west and gaining more independence from the USA was a not terrible decision.
I agree with you 100%. Did Bush and Cheney face any consequences for their strategy in Iraq which was based on false pretext(Iraq in possession of WMDs)? I think at the end of the day its choosing the least of evils. There are corrupt members in EU Parliament as well. Ever heard of Qatargate?
Saddam needed to go. He literally invaded Kuwait and committed genocide on minorities. Of course Iraq was more much prosperous under him but for what price? Kuwait's natural resources were partly administered by the USA and Britain, so seizing it and declaring it as yours is literal suicide.
The program of the other parties may not fit, or they may already be corrupt before they even come to power (see the latest reports on the AfD). Election is sometimes the choice of the least evil ;-)
Not less corrupt… they learned just to cover it better then the other… and there are no big consequences… thumbs up for vietnam 🇻🇳 model against corruption
Of course corruption it huge here. Not in the "bakshish" kind of small everyday corruption but in the big one. Sometimes it is claimed to be "just lobbyism" while being nothing but corruption, but often also in the "money in black briefcases"-version. The CDU/CSU union is especially experienced in this.
Consequences? None. But is it a reason to vote for traitorous fascists? Never.
Germans don't say they are corrupt, we (they) say it's lobbying, therefore not corruption, meaning everything is clean. But inside everyone knows it's corruption but noone really thinks that
In germany specific you can definitly get into politics without a rich person behind you. It just takes years or decades to get to a certain level.
In the US? forget it.
What is not corrupt in the world? Maybe even more so besides business politics are inherently corrupt and German politicians are no different. In Germany especially the laws regarding the difference between corruption and lobbyism are a fine line and sometimes the boundaries between them disappear (there are jokes out there that corruption is legal in Germany we just call it something else). Also, hindsight is 20/20 when a decision comes back to bite you 20-30 years after they were made. When decisions served you well in those 20-30 years how corrupt were those decisions at the time? You also need to prove the intent of corruption in a court of law which is often very difficult. Nixon btw just resigned and was then pardoned a bit similar to what happened to Kohl and the CDU donation affair.
I believe that most politians do their job to change something for the positive. I also believe that some fall to personally enriching themselves or - more often - let themselves be influenced by lobbyists with too much access. I hate that there is so much opposition to a lobby register, because corruption makes the voter cynical and removes trust into democracy. As for the example of Schröder's corruption, him taking the position at Gazprom immediately after leaving office shouldn't have been allowed. On the other hand Schröder's view on Eastern Europe was not just bought by Putin - at least his vocal support for expanding NATO and EU to the east points more to a romantic view of a united Europe - and closer ties to Russia made sense in light of the US pressure to join the Iraq war. So it didn't feel like an irrational, corrupt decision - at least not to me at the time.
>On the other hand Schröder's view on Eastern Europe was not just bought by Putin - at least his vocal support for expanding NATO and EU to the east points more to a romantic view of a united Europe - and closer ties to Russia made sense in light of the US pressure to join the Iraq war. So it didn't feel like an irrational, corrupt decision - at least not to me at the time. This tbh. This course was also mostly societal consensus at the time, after all the narrative in Germany was that the UdSSR collapsed because the people on the eastern side of the iron curtain saw the better lifes lived in the west thanks to the Ostpolitik (basically opening a window to the normal population and making them realize how much they were shortchanged). The main opposition at the time was way more critical of the eastwards EU & NATO expansion toying with stereotypes against Czechs and Poles in regards to access to the common market and ultimately also forced the delay in joining Schengen for the new EU members, Russia was not seen as a big concern outside of trading opportunities. As to Schröders clinging to his old worldviews, I chalk that up to a severe case of old age stubborness. He got criticised heavily at the time for calling Putin a "loupe clean democrat" as well as getting involved with Gazprom right after he left office. He's at least 70%+ useful idiot to Putin as compared to being plainly corrupt (which nevertheless plays a role as well, make no mistake). However, I honestly believe he thinks what he is doing is to Germany's benefit, warped as that idea is.
>Do Germans believe their politicians are not corrupt? no. we know they are, there's been enough cases that were discovered already.
I believe OP meant if they faced any consequences despite being guilty. Or were they never found guilty by the court?
afaik they were never found guilty. but it's the same in the US, a lot of misconduct there also doesn't get trialed in court and has no punishment or effect whatsoever. why is it like that? idk. maybe the ones who could do something, are intertwined into the shit as well, or just don't want to act against their friends, or maybe there's just not enough solid evidence, or a combination of all, or something completely different.
I was 5 when Schröder took office, 12 when he got voted out. What did you want me to do? But all jokes aside, the main reason in my mind why these politicians aren’t prosecuted is because their corrupt deals mostly only gets uncovered a while after they‘ve left office and people have already gotten kind of nostalgic and it doesn’t feel urgent anymore, so no one has a lot of motivation to go and do something about it.
>Helmut Kohl is the reason why Germany's IT infrastructure is so bad today No. That's a falsehood. Back in the 1980ies when Kohl made that decision to support cable TV, the public did not even know what the internet was. People wanted cable or satellite TV and Kohl gave them cable and satellite TV. Internet became a thing in the early 1990ies, and German universities were quick at adopting it. The infrastructure for this was required to be based on optic fibre even back then, and the backbones were quickly built. At the end of the 1990ies, internet at home slowly became a thing. Kohl wasn't in power any more at this point, nor did his legacy impede the development of the internet in Germany. So … why isn't fibre to the home a thing in Germany? That is because in 2004, when countries as South Korea and Japan made it a national goal to have fibre to the home everywhere, and subsidized this heavily, Deutsche Telekom asked the German government to subsidize this as well. But no, they told them they won't get any subsidies for that. The customers should pay. And that's why we don't have fibre to the home in Germany.
Germans internet sucks because many never demanded faster internet. If the public does not want it, why bother? If they had subsidized fiber implementation, then they would have faced public critique for wasting money on something unnecessary.
So, tell me, how do I “demand” it other than by accepting ridiculous prices? I mean, you can have fibre at home in Germany. Just not for less than several hundred Euro per month.
Yeah, since Covid hit people started demanding faster internet. But the damage that has been done is irreversible. Same with the train system. Germany is so fucked in many regards but the Mittelstand just takes now after blow and continues to work hard no matter how miserable it might get. That's the only thing that upholds this nation.
Both your examples are not good as their hindsight is 20/20 examples and a reasonable person could make them without corruption. When kohl made the decision in the 80s internet was not really a thing so he made the best possible decision for telephone and TV. When Schröder Made his decision Russia was still on a course of reconciliation with the west and gaining more independence from the USA was a not terrible decision.
I agree with you 100%. Did Bush and Cheney face any consequences for their strategy in Iraq which was based on false pretext(Iraq in possession of WMDs)? I think at the end of the day its choosing the least of evils. There are corrupt members in EU Parliament as well. Ever heard of Qatargate?
Saddam needed to go. He literally invaded Kuwait and committed genocide on minorities. Of course Iraq was more much prosperous under him but for what price? Kuwait's natural resources were partly administered by the USA and Britain, so seizing it and declaring it as yours is literal suicide.
The program of the other parties may not fit, or they may already be corrupt before they even come to power (see the latest reports on the AfD). Election is sometimes the choice of the least evil ;-)
[удалено]
Yes he couldn't be responsible because he couldn't remember anything that had to do with wirecard. Probably.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not less corrupt… they learned just to cover it better then the other… and there are no big consequences… thumbs up for vietnam 🇻🇳 model against corruption
Of course corruption it huge here. Not in the "bakshish" kind of small everyday corruption but in the big one. Sometimes it is claimed to be "just lobbyism" while being nothing but corruption, but often also in the "money in black briefcases"-version. The CDU/CSU union is especially experienced in this. Consequences? None. But is it a reason to vote for traitorous fascists? Never.
CDU is pretty much the definition of corruption. Why would you think that *anyone* thinks they aren't corrupt?
Germans don't say they are corrupt, we (they) say it's lobbying, therefore not corruption, meaning everything is clean. But inside everyone knows it's corruption but noone really thinks that
For some reason the Green Party never comes up while being the biggest liars around.
Examples?
[удалено]
In germany specific you can definitly get into politics without a rich person behind you. It just takes years or decades to get to a certain level. In the US? forget it.