Germany May Vote In Vain For Change

Election polls suggest more of the same

• CDU pledges to simplify Green rules as growth plummets

• Energy use falls as factories close and demand is destroyed

• Media celebrates loss of nuclear, coal, gas, oil as positive

• EC aims to carbon tax Chinese imports as consumption craters

• Economists disguise de-growth by playing with graphs

• What on God’s earth is the objective? Read on…

(2,300 words or about 11 moments of your company)

Feb 21, 2025

The top issues, we are told, are immigration, living costs, taxes, re-militarisation and war, and Green policy.

Those are valid, though not in the order presented by the legacy media, since one is consequent upon another.

Polling before Germany's weekend election follows the division between those subject to Western occupation and those with lived experience of communism.

Those pesky memories of totalitarianism are interfering with the European Commission's plans for our digital future — and its determination to decide how the people vote.

German is a living example of why you should pay no attention to history (sarc).

But the Brussels warlocks need not worry.

Wikipedia has a summary of polling before Sunday's elections and it suggests more years of 'centralist' tape and spackle to patch over economic collapse.

Election interference

Germany is not alone. The EU tends to interfere more actively to isolate divergent policy in smaller countries like Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Moldova, and even in those that are not members, such as Georgia.

That clampdown will likely extend to the re-run election in Romania (4 and 18 May 2025) and Poland (18 May and 1 June 2025).

We discussed in the last article the Brussels plan to "advance social cohesion" in the face of "polarised public discourse" - using artificial intelligence to monitor the debate of hot political topics.

It will use algorithms to "scrape" data from YouTube comments, X, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and others in order to monitor the comments of elected lawmakers, deputies and parliamentarians, as well as public reaction. [1]

Social determinism

This is not merely about supporting the establishment candidates. It is imposing centralised policy while managing debate. The reasons being:

• policy emanates from the Commission or directoire in Brussels;

• framed in the language of virtue but with few specifics;

• the EU was built as an economic space not a federation;

• the EU has no constitution, nor derives its power from any document, but a patchwork of treaties;

• 27 members states are unlikely to agree on everything, thus they are corralled,

• into obeying the unelected Commission, as arbiter and paragon of everything democratic.

Subscribe to read all of U.S., Russia Outline Ukraine Peace Talks - EU can't let go of the war mindset (Feb 18, 2025

Accidental arsonists

The BBC's headline reads: "Far right looks for election breakthrough as Germany falters."

Makes it sound like an accident, doesn't it? Like the "global boiling" announced by the United Nations and all those wildfires.

Germany has experienced Green policies to constrict the energy supply, at the same time losing Russian gas, while shutting down nuclear power, resulting in de-industrialisation.

In the U.S. the election of president Donald Trump makes it easy to forget that last year the Environmental Protection Agency proposed to “effectively force coal plants to shut down while banning new natural-gas plants” by 2032.

Suddenly, with the arrival of Trump it's all over. Or is it?

Business leaders have begun to abandon environmental and social governance (ESG) or "Green investing" - along with diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

Why de-grow?

I am still homing in on a positive reason for Green degrowth. Perhaps I miss the crocodile in the room.

My questions include:

• If Europe loses its manufacturing what will replace it? Germany and the EU have few high-technology champions;

• Business leaders have spent a decade on Woke, ESG and DEI. Why abandon it?

• Why import pre-industrial migrants into a post-industrial society?

Mainstream economists, like most of the "alt" media, seem determined not to ask these questions. To avoid tough questions they say Europe's economic problems began around 2017. They talk of recession, not depression (if you account for inflation and currency depreciation) and gentle words like slowdown.

Constrict the energy supply, push farmers off the land, shift industries abroad, while 400 million-plus people worldwide suffer with the "Long COVID" (See below)... Surely that's more than an "economic slowdown."

Like all graphs or studies, where you choose to begin has a strong influence upon your conclusions. De-industrialisation emerged as a strategy in Western economies in the 1980s, in the decade that followed the establishment of the Trilateral Commission, and the opening up of China.

Did we stub our toe on a clue?

In this first of two articles we shall look at:

• the expected election results, what that means for economic policy and its social outcomes;

• how the new government would mitigate Green strictures;

• the dramatic decline in European energy use and what it tells us about industrial decline;

• the absence of an energy transition, the reliance on crisis and what that tells us about the objectives;

• why journalists, politicians and economists ignore the origins of the crisis;

• the outsize impact of Covid in the ongoing collapse;

• the origins of deindustrialisation in the Trilateral Commission and the 1970s-80s

• the British miners' strike, de-unionisation, the loss of energy and degrowth

• technology, and Europe's fading chance of recovery.