To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle.
--- George Orwell
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
The New Yorker's Cautionary Tale About 'Germany's Donald Trump‘ Is Also A Warning For Hillary On Open Borders: 'It Can Happen Here'
Last
month when Libertarian presidential contender Gary Johnson couldn’t name a single
foreign leader he admired, Hillary Clinton was more than ready to share
who was her fave. According to Politico, Clinton initially “burst” into
laughter when asked the question, clearly playing for the gaggle of reporters
aboard her campaign plane in Chicago. “Oh let me think,” she chuckled coyly:
One of
my favorites is Angela Merkel because I think she’s been an extraordinary, strong
leader during difficult times in Europe, which has obvious implications for the
rest of the world and, most particularly, our country.
Politico added that that “Clinton praised the
German chancellor’s ‘leadership and steadiness on the Euro crisis,’ while
adding that ‘her bravery in the face of the refugee crisis is something that I
am impressed by.’” Clinton explained that she and Merkel have known each other since the 1990s and spent a
lot of time together. “And I hope I’ll have the opportunity to work with her in
the future," the Democratic nominee quipped. According to Politico, the remark
was a “swipe” against Donald Trump, who had taken to ridiculing Merkel on the
campaign trail as a way of underscoring the looming “disaster” that Clinton’s Merkel-esque
positions on immigration and asylum would bring to the US.
Clinton’s feelings about Merkel were hardly
surprising. Merkel’s pledge to take in over a million Muslim refugees, most of
them from Syria won Merkel the Time magazine 2015 “Person of the Year” Award,
with Merkel being hailed as “Chancellor of the Free World.” Merkel’s pledge also closely mirrors, in
spirit if not in literal detail, Clinton’s own open door immigration policy,
which includes amnesty for the more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the
country right now, as well as doubling the annual number of legal immigrants that
the US absorbs to two million.
What was surprising was Clinton’s seeming
obliviousness to the fact that Merkel’s decision to admit so many Muslim
refugees had fed a huge right wing backlash against her and her governing party,
the Alternative For Germany abbreviated as the AfD. Among some of the steps
Merkel had taken to slow the AfD’s growth and electoral momentum was Merkel’s
widely publicized admission just ten days that she now wished she had played
things quite differently.
If
I could, I would rewind time by many, many years so that I could better prepare
myself and the whole government and all those in positions of responsibility
for the situation that caught us unprepared in the late summer of 2015.
The FT noted that
The
chancellor also distanced herself from her phrase — ‘Wir schaffen das —
we can do it’ — which captured Germans’ belief last summer in their capacity to
integrate the newly arrived refugees. She said it had become “a simple slogan,
almost an empty formula” that underestimated the scale of the integration
challenge.
The
admission was aimed at winning back voters who have flocked to the rightwing,
populist Alternative for Germany party, which has made big inroads this year by
criticising Ms Merkel’s open-door approach to refugees.
Writing in this week’s New Yorker, historian Thomas Meany
explains the political dynamics behind Merkel’s penitent volte-face, as well as upsurge of popular disenchantment with her
immigration policies which is behind the backpedalling. In a piece about what
the headline declares to be “The New Star of Germany’s Far Right,” Meany
focuses on the meteoric rise of the AfD and its 41 year old standard bearer,
Frauke Petry, who is described as “a mother, a scientist, and the leader of the country’s most
successful nationalist phenomenon since the Second World War.”
The
New Yorker piece is a cautionary tale about the politics of immigration here,
highlighting the parallels between the social, cultural and economic forces
that are driving the nationalist surge behind Donald Trump and and what is propelling
the Alternative For Germany, as well as right wing parties elsewhere in Europe.
But it also should be a must-read for Hillary Clinton, who unaware of, or in
denial about, the mess that Angela Merkel has made strikes poses that unintentionally undercut her supposed superiority on policy issues. And if they can jam it in
between time spent on Twitter, campaign reporters might give it a look-see too.
Most of the reporters who wrote about that moment on Hillary’s campaign plane
seemed either not to know, or thought it wasn’t worthy to mention, that
Merkel’s pro-refugee, pro immigrant policies had backfired on her. It’s not as
if Trump hadn’t drawn attention to this. Back in September, in a campaign
speech in Charlotte North Carolina, he’d very specifically referenced it. But
like most of the things Trump says about immigration, it was written off as
just yet more nativism, instead of a reasonable appreciation for just how much third
world immigration any western democracy can stand before its social fabric
begins tearing. As Frauke Petry tells Meany, Hillary Clinton is “almost like a
copy of someone like Merkel—someone who just keeps on with the same policies
that led to the trouble in the first place.”
*****
Meany explains that the AfD is pretty fresh on the German political scene, having won its first seats in regional parliaments in 2013 but that it has since surged.
Meany explains that the AfD is pretty fresh on the German political scene, having won its first seats in regional parliaments in 2013 but that it has since surged.
Earlier this year, support for the AfD reached fifteen per cent
in national polls, three times more than for any previous right-wing party, and
well beyond the five-per-cent threshold required to enter the Bundestag after
next year’s national elections. In a recent election in Mecklenburg-West
Pomerania, where Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has her constituency, the
AfD got more than twenty per cent of the vote, edging Merkel’s party—the
center-right Christian Democratic Union—into third place. A week ago, the AfD
won its first seats in the state parliament of Berlin, traditionally a
social-democratic stronghold, in an election that brought the C.D.U.’s worst
ever result in the city.
It’s part of a
trend sweeping all of Europe.
Populist parties have been flourishing across Europe, and are
already in power in Hungary and Poland, but a far-right resurgence in Germany
is uniquely alarming, both because of its history—the postwar constitution was
designed to curb populist influence—and because of its dominant position on the
continent. “It’s my hope that the future
will bring a Chancellor named Petry,” the leader of Austria’s Freedom Party
recently said. That hope is still far from fruition, but the AfD is already the
most successful far-right phenomenon in Germany since the Second World War.
Merkel’s insistence
that Germany’s history gave it a moral obligation to respond to the
humanitarian crisis has been the single biggest source of the AfD’s rise and
growth, Petry says. “You could say we are Merkel’s children,” she tells
Meany. The catchphrase, “We can do this” was “a call for national solidarity
that achieved the opposite,” Meany writes. “The phrase electrified the German
right, which accused the Chancellor of selling out the country in order to
burnish her cosmopolitan image abroad.” Indeed, within weeks of Merkel’s "Welcome to Germany" announcement, voters began
to flock to the AfD, many of them from Merkel’s own party.
Meany goes on to
explain that for decades, “the German far right has been a limited force, with
easily recognizable supporters—nicotine-stained ex-Nazis in the sixties and
seventies, leather-clad skinheads in the eighties and nineties.” Petry is
something different, he says, “a disarmingly wholesome figure—a former
businesswoman with a Ph.D. in chemistry and four children from her marriage to
a Lutheran pastor.” Her speaking style is dull, with “ornate sentences and
technocratic talking points.” Like most German politicians, Petry's style observes what Meany wryly describes as "the national moratorium on charisma. Her flat affect, however, belies “the extremism of the AfD’s views.”
At the start of this year, Petry said that, in the face of the
recent influx of refugees (many of them fleeing the war in Syria), the police
might have to shoot people crossing the border illegally. In April, the Party
said that head scarves should be banned in schools and universities, and
minarets prohibited. Party members called for a referendum on whether to leave
the euro; for the expulsion of Allied troops, who have been stationed in
Germany since 1945; and for school curriculums that focus more on “positive,
identity-uplifting” episodes in German history and less on Nazi crimes.
Most contentious
of all was her declaration “Islam does not belong in Germany,” which, Meany
reports, promoted Aiman Mazyek, the head of the Muslim Central Council, to
publically compare the AfD to the Nazis. Indeed, while the AfD has many
moderate members, “for whom the AfD is basically a protest vote,” there is a
“dark core” of true believers” who believe that the “reproductive strategies”
of Africans are diluting the ethnic-German population. Petry has so far
functioned a link between the party’s moderate and extremist wings, but the
party itself is moving further right. The radicals are in the ascent.
This new German
nationalism reflects an important shift in the zeitgeist, Meany explains.
For decades, Germany was proud of not being proud—of confronting
its past openly and of accepting the principle of collective guilt. It
developed a political identity based on allegiance to the laws and norms of the
state, rather than on any cultural or ethnic sense of Germanness. As a result,
patriotic displays that would be uncontroversial in other countries, such as
flying the national flag or saying that you love your country, were taboo in
Germany. But, as the memory of the Third Reich recedes and the last generation
of perpetrators and victims dies out, the nation has begun to see itself
differently. The AfD is attracting voters who want Germany to become a normal
country again, with an unashamed sense of nationalism.
Encouraging the
nationalist shift was the publication of a right wing tract called “Germany
Abolishes Itself,” which was authored by a member of the executive board of the
Bundesbank, Thilo Sarrain.
The book, which appeared in 2010 and sold more than a million
and a half copies, argues that everything from high immigrant crime rates to low
test scores among Muslims could be partly traced to genetic factors.
Meany mentions the book as he describes a weekly event in the
city of Dresden, where a few thousand nationalist protesters, a combination of
skinheads and parents with little kids, take to the streets for what they call
an “evening stroll.”
Banners with Angela Merkel’s face filled the streets: there was
“Fatima Merkel,” in a head scarf, and “Adolf Merkel,” wearing a Nazi armband
but with a euro symbol in place of a swastika. “Homeland, Freedom, Tradition!”
the crowd chanted. “Ali Go Home!”
The protest is the work of a movement called pegida—an acronym that
stands for Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West—which
arranges similar demonstrations across Germany. It is not officially allied
with the AfD, but the groups share many supporters.
Although the AfD
attracts a disproportionate number of men--- 85 percent ---Meany says that
“there is no truly typical AfD supporter.” He describes a diverse cross section
of Germans including architects, doctors, corporate managers and pilots nursing
a variety of grievances. One of the marchers was carrying a yellow pennant with
a picture of a brown leather shoe, which a forty-something construction engineer told Meany was the symbol of the Peasants
War of 1524. The engineer used the term Vaterland
without irony or apologies. As they passed by a group of teenagers loitering
outside a MacDonald’s, he lamented those who “just sit there while the nation
slips away from them.”
Meany
stresses that a series of dramatic events over the last year linking refugees
with terrorism, crime and Islamic cultural estrangement was the match that lit
the AfD’s populist explosion, putting the nation on edge.
On New Year’s Eve, in Cologne, roving groups of Middle Eastern
and North African men sexually assaulted and robbed hundreds of women as they
celebrated in the city center. The German Federal Criminal Police Office drew
an analogy with cases of group sexual harassment in the Arab world—the ones
that occurred during the Tahrir Square protests are the most famous
instance—and the crimes were quickly established in the public imagination as a
specifically Islamic phenomenon. In July, there was a weeklong spate of violent
attacks, unconnected with one another but involving perpetrators of Muslim
heritage: a teen-age Afghan refugee pledging loyalty to isis wounded four
people with an axe on a train near Würzburg; an Iranian-German gunman killed
nine people at a shopping center in Munich; in Reutlingen, a small town near
Stuttgart, a machete-wielding Syrian refugee murdered a pregnant Polish woman
at the kebab shop where they both worked; and a Syrian asylum seeker blew
himself up outside a night club in the Bavarian town of Ansbach, injuring
fifteen people.
Meany reports that
the official government reaction has been a to minimize the violence by leaving
the dots unconnected in such as a way as to ignore that the incidents were very
much a function of Merkel’s ill-considered invitation to displaced middle easterners.
The response of Merkel’s government, and of most of the German
press, has been measured, emphasizing the unique aspects of each attack: the
Munich shooting turned out to be a case of right-wing, rather than Islamist,
extremism; the kebab-shop murder a crime of passion; the Syrian asylum seeker a
psychiatric case.
The German press
has been an active enabler in this kind of official gaslighting, Petry charges,
which, shades of American-style PC, is consistent
with what she says is a liberal tendency to suppress politically inconvenient
truths.“Big German media are always careful about what they report,” she scornfully
explained to Meany, adding that “Our political opponents absolutely avoid
acknowledging the factors of illegal migration and open borders in these
attacks.”
Retaliatory mob
violence is on the rise. Meany reports that the German Interior Ministry
estimates that overall violence against foreigners increased by more than forty
per cent last year, including six hundred and sixty-five assaults on asylum
shelters, which Meany says represents an average of almost two a day, as well
as fifty-five cases of arson, and more than a hundred attacks on individuals.
The attacks on immigrants are concentrated in the economically stagnant, mostly
Eastern, towns where the government has located a disproportionate number of
its refugee shelters as a way to stimulate the local economy. “The most
notorious attacks (by angry German nationalists on refugees) have been in Saxony,
Petry’s state,” Meany notes.
At the start of this year in Chemnitz, neo-Nazis beat and
trampled a thirteen-year-old Tunisian girl. In Bautzen, a small town close to
the Czech border, a large crowd cheered when a refugee shelter went up in
flames. In Clausnitz, another crowd attacked a bus transporting refugees to a
shelter.
The attacks take place in a sinister atmosphere of municipal
complicity. The police keep interventions to a minimum, and prosecutions are
rare, in part because few witnesses come forward.
A left wing
critic of the AfD tells Meany that Petry’s party “uses the refugee crisis to
foment a propaganda of fear in the minds of its followers. Insults and daily
Islamophobia have led to the desecration of houses of worship, and bullying in the
streets.”
Petry
vociferously rejects the accusation. The day after the Clausnitz attack, she gave a press
conference during which she said that refugees on the bus incited the locals my
making offensive, possibly obscene gestures at them. When Meany told her that “the
AfD affiliation of the attackers was well established,” she became flustered.
“That’s not true!” she kept saying. “There were no AfD members connected with
any of the attacks, or whatever you are calling them.” Dismissing any link
between AfD rhetoric and populist violence, Petry takes refuge in a kind of
feckless logic. “We have to distinguish between the causes and the symptoms,”
she says. “In order to get rid of the symptom, you have to get rid of the
problem. After all, if there were no immigrants there would have been no
protests.”
Facing the
nationalist backlash in the voting booths and in the streets, Merkel and other
CDU politicians have been trying to push the angry genie back into the bottle.
Meany says that
Following the sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s eve, Merkel
made a series of moves that expedited the deportation of refugees who commit
crimes and cut a deal with the President of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, to
reduce the number of Syrians crossing into Europe. After the recent attacks,
Merkel’s Interior Minister, Thomas de Maizière, called for a ban on burkas in a
wide range of public contexts—an appropriation of the AfD’s party line. The
government also announced a new Integration Law, which gives the state the
power to determine where refugees can live and requires them to learn German
and to take classes on the country’s history and culture. The underlying
assumption—that immigrants don’t want to learn the language—is a widespread
belief in the AfD, and the C.D.U.’s embrace of it represents an about-face:
such programs have been underfunded for years.
So far, Merkel’s
tack to the right “has done nothing to halt the AfD’s rise, and politicians in
other parties have been alarmed at how much power the AfD now has to shape
government policy. Some analysts see the AdF pushing Merkel’s governing
Christian Democrat Union to the right and it being only a matter of time before
it enters into some kind of coalition with the CDU that gives it a role in
forming a government where it will be able to exercise real power. Meany
explains that
In a recent election in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, where
Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has her constituency, the AfD got more
than twenty per cent of the vote, edging Merkel’s party—the center-right
Christian Democratic Union—into third place. A week ago, the AfD won its first
seats in the state parliament of Berlin, traditionally a social-democratic
stronghold, in an election that brought the C.D.U.’s worst ever result in the
city.
As Petry sees it,
Merkel’s moralistic fervor on the refugee question was an extension of a political
culture that was overburdened by liberal pieties and was in fact anti-democratic
in being “disdainful of the views of ordinary Germans.” She told Meany that “I
myself am not morally good. I’m just a human being. I try to stick to the
rules. And I think there is a majority of Germans who agree with me.”
The report ends with Petry whipping out her phone to quote something to Meany from Nietzsche’s Zarathustra: “The good have always been the beginning of the end." Saint Hillary, as the late Michael Kelly called her in a 1993 Times Magazine profile, should take heed.
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)