|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On March 28 2017 02:20 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 02:07 Big J wrote:
The Strauß doctrin is double-edged. On the one hand, it is the wish that there is no party right of the CSU. On the other hand it means that the CSU should be a very right-wing party to not leave any room for others, even if that means the CSU and CDU would have to part ways. (there is a historical CDU/CSU context between Strauß and Kohl behind this statement) There is a very big difference between the CSU and any new right-wing party. Political details aside, the CSU does not protrait itself as meta-political. Every new right wing party in Germany has placed itself above 'the established political system' and toyed with revolutionary tones. (AfD: "we'll sweep established parties out of the parliaments"). This is the defining feature of anti-democratic parties in post-war Germany. The CSU does not fall at all into this category even if they sometimes taunt with AfD like positions, the tone is completely different. Nobody votes for the CSU because he has a right-wing system overthrow in mind.
So, whether or not you consider a party (or its supporters) as right wing dependes on the "tone", and not on the acutaly politics they do and advocate?
The CSU doesnt portray istself as "meta-political" because they are already an established party. If the AfD where to become one, they would change their tone too, even if their politics remain the same.
Big J manged to to understand the essential meaning of the Strauß doctrin quite well.
|
Yes, intention and party history matter in politics. Policies aren't points in a vacuum, they usually have some direction. When the Greens talk about stopping the funding of foreign preachers they come from a standpoint of secularism and they don't have any ill intention. When the same talking point comes out of the AfD you can be sure that it is an inflammatory remark aimed at riling up the local population, not a genuine way to foster integration.
Likewise, there is difference between making Erdogan the president of Turkey and being a president in France or the US even if all positions hold the same nominal power.
And the CSU doesn't just potrait itself as a traditional party because they are around for a long time, but because they explicitly target Conservative ('bürgerliche') voterbase rather than rabid nationalists. The AfD could obviously drop the inflammatory positions right now, they'd just lose half of their protest voterbase as a result.
|
|
|
Some Americans from Georgia are scratching their heads.
|
On March 28 2017 19:41 maybenexttime wrote:Some Americans from Georgia are scratching their heads.
Care to elaborate?
|
Georgia the country vs Georgia the US state. With the implication that US-americans are uneducated and don't know the former exists.
|
On March 28 2017 19:45 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 19:41 maybenexttime wrote:Some Americans from Georgia are scratching their heads. Care to elaborate?
When Euros talk about "in Georgia this and that happened", many people from the state of Georgia in the US feel confused, because they believe the talk was about them.
Like when Russia invaded Georgia during the Olympics... And people were confused how Russia managed to invade US mainland.
|
I'm so dumb, sorry 
|
On March 28 2017 19:56 Simberto wrote:
Georgia the country vs Georgia the US state. With the implication that US-americans are uneducated and don't know the former exists.
Well, I specifically said "some" so as not to offend anyone from America. :-) There were some funny reactions among Americans when Russia invaded Georgia. 
And it's not really a matter of being uneducated. I've met an American who studied mechanical engineering, was quite intelligent, but had absolutely no grasp of world affairs. He watched only his local TV, not even a nation-wide network, and e.g. had no idea who Angela Merkel was despite spending several months in the Netherlands as an intern. ;-)
|
The European parliament will veto any Brexit deal that prevents EU citizens who move to the UK during the next two years from having the same rights to live and work in Britain as those already in the country.
The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, and MEPs are understood to be concerned by reports that the British government wants 29 March, when it officially notifies the EU of its intention to leave, to be the “cut-off date” for the free movement of people.
The issue was discussed at a meeting between Barnier and senior MEPs on Monday night. A five-page resolution detailing the European parliament’s red lines, which will be voted on next Wednesday, was subsequently amended specifically to rule out any “degradation” of the rights of EU nationals arriving in the UK over the next two years.
Sir Tim Barrow, the UK’s permanent representative to the EU, will deliver a letter triggering article 50 talks at 12.30pm on Wednesday, after which the clock is ticking on the two years of talks allowed under the treaty of Lisbon.
It has been repeatedly reported that the British government believes that 29 March 2017 is the appropriate date after which EU nationals moving to the UK would have rights different from those already in the country, although government officials say publicly that that is a matter for the negotiations.
Government sources have briefed that a cut-off date at the end of the two years of talks would open the UK to a rush of EU citizens seeking to enter the country. The European parliament’s resolution will nevertheless insist on “equity, reciprocity, symmetry and non-discrimination” for all EU nationals as long as Britain remains a member state.
The leader of the socialist bloc in the European parliament, Gianni Pittella, declined to comment on the detail of the European parliament’s resolution, but confirmed that MEPs would not accept discrimination between EU citizens.
He said: “We have heard that Theresa May is considering a cut-off date as the notification date. We completely disagree on this and we believe that the British citizens and those from the other 27 states are EU citizens until the day of the divorce. During this period the UK is a member state with full rights and obligations.
“It cannot be right that someone signing a work contract in the UK on Tuesday has more rights than someone signing a contract on Thursday.”
In a further sign that the chamber will prove a major thorn in the British prime minister’s side, the Guardian has learned that MEPs will also insist in their resolution that a trade deal cannot be sealed within two years but only after the UK leaves, echoing the position of the European commission.
Source
|
On March 28 2017 21:09 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +The European parliament will veto any Brexit deal that prevents EU citizens who move to the UK during the next two years from having the same rights to live and work in Britain as those already in the country.
The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, and MEPs are understood to be concerned by reports that the British government wants 29 March, when it officially notifies the EU of its intention to leave, to be the “cut-off date” for the free movement of people.
The issue was discussed at a meeting between Barnier and senior MEPs on Monday night. A five-page resolution detailing the European parliament’s red lines, which will be voted on next Wednesday, was subsequently amended specifically to rule out any “degradation” of the rights of EU nationals arriving in the UK over the next two years.
Sir Tim Barrow, the UK’s permanent representative to the EU, will deliver a letter triggering article 50 talks at 12.30pm on Wednesday, after which the clock is ticking on the two years of talks allowed under the treaty of Lisbon.
It has been repeatedly reported that the British government believes that 29 March 2017 is the appropriate date after which EU nationals moving to the UK would have rights different from those already in the country, although government officials say publicly that that is a matter for the negotiations.
Government sources have briefed that a cut-off date at the end of the two years of talks would open the UK to a rush of EU citizens seeking to enter the country. The European parliament’s resolution will nevertheless insist on “equity, reciprocity, symmetry and non-discrimination” for all EU nationals as long as Britain remains a member state.
The leader of the socialist bloc in the European parliament, Gianni Pittella, declined to comment on the detail of the European parliament’s resolution, but confirmed that MEPs would not accept discrimination between EU citizens.
He said: “We have heard that Theresa May is considering a cut-off date as the notification date. We completely disagree on this and we believe that the British citizens and those from the other 27 states are EU citizens until the day of the divorce. During this period the UK is a member state with full rights and obligations.
“It cannot be right that someone signing a work contract in the UK on Tuesday has more rights than someone signing a contract on Thursday.”
In a further sign that the chamber will prove a major thorn in the British prime minister’s side, the Guardian has learned that MEPs will also insist in their resolution that a trade deal cannot be sealed within two years but only after the UK leaves, echoing the position of the European commission. Source
I mean, we can cut the free travel of people tomorrow sure.
It also means every trade deal is cancelled tomorrow and nothing from the EU can get into or out of the UK until a new deal is negotiated (which will take months at best)
Not sure thats a deal the English want either.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 28 2017 19:41 maybenexttime wrote:Some Americans from Georgia are scratching their heads.
Whenever I talk about Georgia the state, I always say, "nice state but too bad about that Russian invasion."
|
The hidden agenda of the EU is obviously to expand its boarders akin to the european songcontest. Be ready Australia.
|
Austria pulled the troll of the year. Everyone was fearing the alt-right would win and mess with immigrants, then today the left government played the same card. I wasn't expecting that.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 29 2017 03:49 SoSexy wrote:
Austria pulled the troll of the year. Everyone was fearing the alt-right would win and mess with immigrants, then today the left government played the same card. I wasn't expecting that.
Got a source for context?
|
On March 29 2017 03:49 SoSexy wrote:
Austria pulled the troll of the year. Everyone was fearing the alt-right would win and mess with immigrants, then today the left government played the same card. I wasn't expecting that.
What happened?
|
Protests across Russia on Sunday marked the coming of age of a new adversary for the Kremlin: a generation of young people driven not by the need for stability that preoccupies their parents but by a yearning for change.
Thousands of people took to the streets across Russia, with hundreds arrested. Many were teenagers who cannot remember a time before Vladimir Putin took power 17 years ago.
"I've lived all my life under Putin," said Matvei, a 17-year-old from Moscow, who said he came close to being detained at the protest on Sunday, but managed to run from the police.
"We need to move forward, not constantly refer to the past."
A year before Putin is expected to seek a fourth term, the protests were the biggest since the last presidential election in 2012.
The driving force behind the protests was Alexei Navalny, a 40-year-old anti-corruption campaigner who uses the Internet to spread his message, bypassing the state-controlled television stations where nearly all older Russians get their news.
"None of my peers watches television and they don't trust it," said Maxim, an 18-year-old from St Petersburg who took part in a protest there.
He said messages about the demonstration were shared among his friends via a group chat on a messaging app: "Half the group went to the demonstration."
Navalny, who was arrested at one of Sunday's protests, tailors his message for YouTube and VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook.
One of his recent videos, a 50 minute expose accusing Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev of secretly owning an archipelago of luxury homes, has been watched more than 14 million times on YouTube. Medvedev's spokeswoman called the allegations "propagandistic attacks" unworthy of detailed comment and said they amounted to pre-election posturing by Navalny.
While older Russians may have turned a blind eye to official corruption during years when living standards improved, younger Russians speak of it in terms of moral outrage.
"Why do I believe that what is happening right now is wrong? Because when I was little, my mum read fairy tales to me, and they said you should not steal, you should not lie, you should not kill," said Katya, a 17-year-old who was at the protest in Moscow. "What I see happening now, you should not do," she said.
Like other students who spoke to Reuters at the demonstrations, Katya, Maxim and Matvei asked that their surnames not be published to avoid repercussions.
uk.reuters.com
What's your opinion on this LegalLord? Any significance to it?
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39415631
Trump signs order undoing Obama climate change policies
No surprise...
UK, EU, India and China will honour the agreement independently from the US.
We really should protest for tariffs on US imported goods until this shit is remedied...
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Well it's hard to properly see it when you only look at it from a Western reporting perspective (which is always very strongly anti-Putin in not always reasonable ways), but I'll say this much. It's definitely true that there's resentment against Putin among the younger and less-established, but more highly educated, population. There is a perception, not altogether inaccurate, that it's hard to reach a level of well-being that said individuals feel that they have earned for their educational gains. And there is a long string of issues of corruption that genuinely need to be addressed.
While the West tends to pour it all on Putin, I see the truth as more along the lines of that Putin's government elevated the standard of living high enough that people started to care more. Who cares that you can't open a business without bribes if you're more worried about how to get your next meal? The 90s were a pretty shitty time and Putin's government helped to consolidate the wealthy crook class into a wealthy business class. On the scale of decades the change is massive.
I don't blame the youth for seeing it from a different perspective, from looking at where developed Western nations are and thinking that that's where they should be. They definitely underestimate how much Putin has done towards that end and how bad things were in the past, but their concerns are valid. The anti-corruption effort needs quite a bit of doing. And there is of course the concern that older people are worried that any massive change could lead to 90s-era ruination (though many see the 2014-present economic troubles as a stress test to see how durable the newer economy is).
On Navalny. He's a character and he's boisterous enough to get some attention. But honestly I and many others just don't like him. He's like a leftist counterpart to certain Western populists. A guy who makes some noise on important issues but is clueless as to how to actually fix any of the problems he talks about. It doesn't help that he has a Yale degree at a time when people are rightfully wary of Western-educated shills in Russia and even more so elsewhere that essentially serve as a fifth column.
As for the protests themselves. I can't say that they seem to have much more significance than just the issues in general. It's a way to raise awareness on issues people care about. A good thing to do to be sure, but I have no doubt this will be painted in Westen media as a brooding revolution of some sort. Hardly; just a more garden variety large organized protest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
