Democrazia Cristiana Tedesca

[Johannes Schneider]

Chris Burford wrote:
> I do not know if you would
> agree, but in some ways the German constitution was set up by the allies
to
> be a model of rational bourgeois democracy.
This is certainly true for some areas, but I am not sure whether the funding
of political parties was an area of allied involvment. What I remember was
they were mostly concerned about the core of the state apparatus, ie. the
army, police and secret services.
> The fact that it too has been
> hit by the severe funding scandals shows this is one of the most
vulnerable
> areas of the bourgeois system.
I dont think so. All those funding scandals tend to make people cynical and
apolitical seeing all political activity as dirty.
I think in the days of 'shareholder value' social justice is the central
issue.
> It suggests radical democrats should be able to make headway in most
> countries with a prolonged campaign to restrict capitalist funding of
> political parties.
Sounds good, but what should be the alternative, state funding?
Part of the present scandal is that the funding was already illegal but the
CDU simply did not care, so who is to control it?
Furthermore one could imagine a lot of indirect ways of direct financial
capitalist influence on politics.
> Why is Kohl resisting naming the donors so steadfastly? Is it just that
> some of them are arms dealers?
Thats the 1 million marks question everyone is asking here. Up to now there
are only guesses, so here are mine:
- if Kohl reveals any names, people will ask, what will did you do for them
and a completely new Pandorra`s box will be opened.
- donors laundered money and they still can go to jail for something worse
than tax evasion
- Kohl received the money not when he told, but much more earlier, but wants
to hid it now for some reason
- someone is blackmailing Kohl
Of course thats all pure speculation, but noone believes all this 'I have
given my word stuff and everyone expects something really fishy.
Johannes