--- moominek at aol.com wrote:
> Yes, in 2005 the "welfare refom" was in broad parts
> of the population
> was seen as a scandal and unjust.
> But up to now the majority became used to it. The
> number of directly
> affected went back. They learned, that every
> job may bee better than this kind of welfare.
That is quite possible, but how do we then explain the SPD's free-fall in elections, polls, and membership? It's fairly obvious that the downfall of the SPD is directly attributable to the Hartz reforms. Die Linke would not be the force it is otherwise.
> The greens - not only in Germany - are a hard core
> liberal party,
> divided from the traditional liberals more by
> culture then by politics. No chance.
Agree, I was going to post something similar in response to Dennis. I think North American observers are mostly in the dark about what a rotten neo-liberal party the Greens are. They an organic food version of the FDP.
I also largely agree with your assessment of Die Linke, although I think there are more possibilities for maneuver there, depending upon the state of extra-parliamentary activity. It's depressing how many people seemed to have shifted to work inside the party. Just about every Trotskyite group in the country seems to have prioritized it.
> lesser evil. It was
> Aneluy Novus, who saw the deposit insurance as
> social democratic
> politics. I do not.
For the record, I was trying to be snide. I apparently did not convey it very well.
> But we should not continue german debates in a
> US-Forum.
I'm not sure if Doug seems to see this as a specifically US-forum. With you, myself, and Dmytri, the contingent of posters from Germany is fairly large, and Chris Doss is regularly writing from Russia, and Wendy from Ireland, not to mention James from England.