Saturday, May 17, 2008
Self-hating Germans
I suppose the world should be grateful that the Germans have so submerged their pride in nation that their chancellor can lick the boots of a Latin American dictator without getting hammered in the press and at the polls. But still, isn't Merkel's groveling a bit difficult to take in?
12 Comments:
By 
Escort81, at
Sun May 18, 12:02:00 AM:
TH -
I must be just missing something.
Your LGF link (and LGF's link to the Reuters piece) explains that Chavez is apologizing for one of his many stupid remarks, and Merkel is accepting his apology. How does that constitute groveling or boot-licking on her part? What is she supposed to say, "No, I don't accept your apology," whip out an old Luger and shoot him in the head? Why do you want her to start behaving like my old girlfriends (not the Luger part)?
That said, modern day Germans do have a certain guilt that they carry that gives them a soft edge in international affairs. I am perferctly happy for that to continue on for a while, at least until all of my father's generation has gone on to their reward.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun May 18, 02:56:00 PM:
LGF: "But instead of the German Chancellor shaking the grinning thug’s hand, it will be the President of the United States."
You don't have to like people to do business with them. (Right-wing idealists are as annoying as left-wing idealists. There is a reason most successful international businesspeople are pragmatists.)
By 
, at
Sun May 18, 07:41:00 PM:
DEC,
You're correct, to a degree.
The business deal with the person you don't approve of is still "just business", with at least somebody making some gain in the deal.
But making a 'political' deal with someone that you don't approve of gives them some kind of moral sanction or approval, based on your deal. An example is the ongoing dealings with the so-called Palestinians. They have only reached the state of recognition they have due to murder and terror.
Why has the US and European nations dealt with theses people? What have WE gained?
Is it any wonder that groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah use the same tactics in hopes of more of these sort of 'political' deals?
-David
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun May 18, 09:05:00 PM:
"...gives them some kind of moral sanction or approval, based on your deal."
Sorry, David, I don't buy that. I think like a Swiss banker.
People who worry about process rather than results seldom achieve their goals.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun May 18, 10:18:00 PM:
I concur with David.
Just because you think like a Swiss banker doesn't mean that others do, and the entire idea of 'legitimacy' depends on public perception. If your actions contribute to a change in the public's perspective of group X, then you are seen to have performed that change yourself. You might just see it as a business deal, but if you're the President (or Chancellor, or whatever) then other people's perspective and opinion on that interaction can be more important than the deal itself.
One of the flaws (quirks?) of democratic government is that public opinion (justified or ignorant) can exert such influence on the movers and shakers.
By , at
Sun May 18, 10:39:00 PM:
In unrelated news: Earlier this wee President Bush was rebuffed while asking the Saudi monarchy to increase oil production.
Unrelated on so many levels.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun May 18, 11:38:00 PM:
"...public opinion (justified or ignorant) can exert such influence on the movers and shakers."
That's where "leadership" comes in. Remember, Nixon went to China.
Re: "...moral sanction or approval."
Chavez was "elected." You guys like democracy. Live with it.
By Dawnfire82, at
Mon May 19, 01:07:00 AM:
Bush demonstrated "leadership," and in so doing left such a distasteful legacy that he may have handed the entirety of the elected federal government to the opposing party, which has more or less promised to undo everything he ever did. What does it matter if he helped accomplish good in the world (Iraq, namely) if, because of his leadership style and its ripples in the system, it gets undone? Or causes something worse?
"Chavez was "elected." You guys like democracy. Live with it."
And I take it that you don't, and don't? What was that you said elsewhere? Sniping is a cop-out? Hmm.
By Gary Rosen, at
Mon May 19, 01:42:00 AM:
"What is she supposed to say, "No, I don't accept your apology," whip out an old Luger and shoot him in the head?"
We can dream, can't we?
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon May 19, 01:53:00 AM:
DF82, Bush made some right decisions (and some wrong ones). But he has no leadership skills. FDR had leadership skills. Ronald Reagan had leadership skills.
By Escort81, at
Mon May 19, 02:20:00 AM:
DEC - Any sense of whether Obama has presidential leadership skills, beyond teleprompter-aided oratory (at which he excels)?
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon May 19, 02:49:00 AM:
Escort81 - Hillary doesn't have them. Obama might have them. McCain is the safest choice.
