Thank you for covering this necessary, if depressing, development in Germany. I must say (as a Brit) that I have only in the last year or so grasped just how differently many Europeans think of free speech to most Americans.
I find it baffling watching Scholz in an interview, with a straight face say, ‘of course we believe in free speech… but what we don’t allow is extremist views’, referring to the AfD, without seeing this seemingly obvious contradiction.
He and many others seem to miss one fundamental issue in that it is the government which gets to decide what is extreme, and therefore quasi or outright illegal speech. That is not a world in which I could live comfortably.
Indeed, many seem to define Musk or Vance’s position of free speech actually being free, as somehow the extreme position.
I wonder how much this cultural misunderstanding comes from Europeans not studying American history (despite constantly mocking Americans for the reverse). As I slowly make my way through the excellent biographical trilogy of Roosevelt by Morris that you recommended, it strikes me just how differently the purportedly universal western value of freedom is understood.
I remain optimistic however and hope that eventually these elites will eventually be shown the door as their increasingly terrible performance at the ballot box makes change impossible to resist!
John, Once again very diplomatic... and needed to be said. Have an enjoyable weekend.
It's Derby Day here in the USA...hats, mint juleps, and a shared cultural heritage and continuity. And let's not forget, Amazing Horses!!!! jockies and trainer's .
Yes, this is absolutely ridiculous. I understand that the horrors of the past must never be repeated, but this is neither the way to prevent them nor a valid excuse for what is happening now. If anything, it only adds fuel to the ultras. Are we really saying that 25% of the voting population are lunatics? Or is it more likely they feel utterly disenfranchised by the incumbents?
You are right about free speech. It is not quite the same in Europe, perhaps because of history. I agree there are worrying trends emerging that aim to monitor and control it. Interpretations may differ, but my hope is that the original shared belief in free speech helps hold things together rather than completely divide. Nothing is perfect. Still, we must call it out when it is under threat, and in this case it was right to do so. It certainly looks ugly for Germany.
I still think Merz is capable, but he needs to stand firmer on core principles. Germany cannot compete on price, but it has in areas historically led on quality and expertise, if it can still sustain them. The toothpaste has been squeezed to the end.
As for assimilation, the responsibility cuts both ways. Where is the serious strategy from politicians? You have touched on the core of it, and it remains dangerous territory even now. But it needs to be talked about, and done so rationally and openly. At present, there is no true equivalent of the American Dream in Europe.
Hi Erik. By track record, I meant Merz’s longstanding reputation for economic competence. He spent years in the Bundestag, led the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, built credibility in the private sector, and then returned. To me, that suggests a real sense of vocation. It may not be executive office, but it’s a far cry from nothing. I’d be inclined to give the chap a chance.
Hi Erik. I am not a German national, so this is just a view from the sidelines. That said, his track record shows a strong grasp of economic policy, and I do believe he genuinely cares about Germany and the preservation of its cultural identity. From what I’ve seen, he also seems far more capable than Alice and Tino. It’s not just what he is doing, but how he compares to the alternatives. If he can shake off the Merkelism, pivot to an EROI centric energy policy, commit to meaningful and long term defence investment, and protect and revitalise what made Germany valuable today, such as its industrial and manufacturing strength, it could be a strong term in office. Here’s to hoping.
He quit politics the past 25 years and his come-back so far was a dismal failure. Last but one election, he was booted out for an utterly incompetent CDU candidate - such a misfit I forgot his name - and the last election, he did hardly any better, in fact worse than the dismal Merkel elections and 15%-20% behind where Adenauer and Kohl routinely pumped the Union.
He's now struggled to get any handle at all on the negotiation and left the goal of the Union wide open for the SPD to kick penalties in without a goal-keeper. Even the Gruene who did not and do not participate in the coalition had more influence on the government program than the Union. How is that possible?
The Germans themselves have long since decided he is no good and he consistently fails to convince Germans he is chancellor-calibre poll after poll. The Germans don't want him.
You referred to "track record" - what track record would that be?
He is not chancellor yet because of his own mistakes: he missed his pass in 2005, in 2021 and did dismally in 2025 (the election should have been in 2024).
The previous coalition did not stumble because of a good opposition but because it just managed to suck on its own so much FDP pulled the plug.
He delayed the election in 2024 as he wasn't ready; delayed the confirmation vote now as he still isn't ready and allowed the SPD and Gruene (who are not in the government even) to bake in a government agreement which offers nothing to the Union.
He has no answer whatsoever to the incredibly weak von der Leyen and ineffective EU.
His policy is more of the same that wrecked Germany and the EU.
Is Joe Biden available? Joe might be a better pick.
By track record, I meant Merz’s longstanding reputation for economic competence. He spent years in the Bundestag, led the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, built credibility in the private sector, and then returned. To me, that suggests a real sense of vocation. It may not be executive office, but it’s a far cry from nothing. I’d be inclined to give the chap a chance.
Democracy in action! What happened in Australia? Who would’ve predicted both Aussies and Canadians backing centre left leaders? That’s two Anglosphere outfits bucking the populist trend. Didn’t expect that!
Uninspiring opposition candidate in Peter Dutton, even though those that know him know he's a decent chap and capable.
But he's considered 'Trumpian', by ignorant virtue of being slightly right of centre (although that is debatable, considering his bland policies, more likely his 9 years in the police force contributed to that image, along with his bald (skin) head - so concerned were they that they stuck a pair of spectacles on him to soften it!).
Two points I'd add:
1. In Australia they have mandatory voting, so the increasingly held view is that politicians have to be deliberately bland in order not to offend the ignorant masses who are forced to vote, else face a £50 fine (hence Dutton's blandness).
2. As Australia tends to be 5 to 10 years behind the rest of the world, they haven't worked out how awful woke is yet. Give it 3 more years and the country will probably be primed for a swing right, as mass migration continues to wreak havoc on the housing market and net zero policies continue to drive up prices.
Hi Simon, Interesting, particularly your last point about social trends and time lags. Yes, given Europe and America’s increasing desire to move on from economically ruinous green policies (even the fanatical Greta has given up, and has channeled her anti-western and anti-American behaviour towards Hamas and the Middle East) where will this leave Labour and Albanese? We shall see but they’ll have to trim the sails at some point.
Albo is not even close to awful like Starmer, and his Treasurer Jim Chalmers is capable as far as I can tell (unlike the imbecilic Rachel Reeves) - he even delivered two budget surpluses in 2023 and 24, and a tax cut - but go woke go broke, as the saying goes, so yes, let's see.
I am not sure that the difference between the USA and Europe is a different understanding or definition of "freedom".
Europe invented socialism, communism, fascism.
Just a few rare intermezzi, mostly in England & Scotland: but freedom as guiding principle for politics and social organisation is the exception rather than the rule over here.
I think there’s a strong argument that historical Europe invented the foundations of the free world. Just because its worst ideas get remembered more often doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that it also produced some of its best.
Europe invented socialism, communism and fascism and in all but the most favourable circumstances turns there to look for solutions.
Phases of freedom have been very short-lived and mostly limited in time and regionally and intellectually limited to the Anglosphere.
Maybe Switzerland is another isle of enlightenment and progress (in opposition to the German and Habsburg mainstream which it has fought off tooth and nail).
It is worth remembering that England gave the world the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, and the principle of absolute free speech in Parliament. That legacy helps explain the enduring significance of the Anglosphere.
So did other countries at around the same time by the way. The history of other countries/peoples is just less well known because we now live, clearly, in a world where the english language is dominant and that impacts the history books and academic programs too. But such treaties, between king (of whatever kind) and nobles (of whatever kind) popped up left and right in medieval Europe (Europe: true enough).
There were parliaments elsewhere. There were even elected kings (Poland) and elected emperors (Holy Roman Empire).
Feudalism showed up in Asia too (Japan comes to mind).
Perhaps Erik, others had their moments. But only England turned it into a lasting system. Magna Carta, Parliament, common law, it all stuck. While others were wiped out by kings or chaos, the English model evolved, spread across the Anglosphere, and still underpins half the free world. That I would argue is the lasting difference.
Of course, Rome and the Napoleonic Code had their influence and still do, but neither gave us modern parliamentary democracy or the principle that the executive is bound by law and answerable to an elected assembly. Also, happy VE week!
The polical "refugees" in Europe are entitled to vacation in their home countries, where they are politically persecuted, and most do holiday at home. They are certainly wealthy enough to take up that offer, given how much money they steal over here...
Germany came up with an extremely (overly) generous "Buergergeld" social security where the unemployed get paid an after tax equivalent and frequently higher income than a regular (working) employee or family.
Just a few years into the scheme: €22 billion out of €45 billion is paid to illegal immigrants.
He can become Friedrich Merz. He can simply deny SPD and deny Gruene, what they like. Then, there is no government for the time being, unless SPD moves. SPD are even weaker than Union, but he has not driven that point home and picked up the bacon for his own team.
Friedrich Merkel has not extracted a single concession out of the SPD for perpetuating their cushy jobs in Berlin.
There is no federal government without CDU/CSU. He has not attempted this line. He has not used his power. He is not an apt, effective politician. That was his failure in defeating Merkel in the post Kohl period and prompted his exit then. He is equally mediocre and unfit for the job today. Fit for a debating club, but not for the real game. He is just too lazy.
He can also open the regional politics to Union/AfD coalitions. That puts a blocking minority in the Bundesrat for everything SPD wants but Union does not as federal Bundestag initiatives go nowhere in the regionally assembled Bundesrat. He is just too lazy.
Besides for critical legislation, he can craft an ad hoc single-issue Union/AfD swing majority in the federal Bundestag. The SPD and the Gruene will hate that. But whatever: there is a majority: in the Bundestag, Bundesrat and the COUNTRY AT LARGE for critical legislation. But he is just too lazy to craft it and break it out.
Compare to Trump: Trump finds a way forward for initiatives he and everyone else knows need to happen but no one of the organised forces (this includes the GOP) want. Trump is not lazy. He is fierce. He practices what Mittérand in the 90ies called: "Une majorité, ça se fait!" when Delors declined to enter the presidential election as his successor for not having a ready government to work with him.
It is really targeted defamation by the Verfassungsschutz - by the way, they are all political appointees, as are the Verfassungsrichter in Karlsruhe. They had dinner with (Angela) Merkel in the Bundeskanzlersamt the evening before issuing one of their key judgements.
Dear John,
Thank you for covering this necessary, if depressing, development in Germany. I must say (as a Brit) that I have only in the last year or so grasped just how differently many Europeans think of free speech to most Americans.
I find it baffling watching Scholz in an interview, with a straight face say, ‘of course we believe in free speech… but what we don’t allow is extremist views’, referring to the AfD, without seeing this seemingly obvious contradiction.
He and many others seem to miss one fundamental issue in that it is the government which gets to decide what is extreme, and therefore quasi or outright illegal speech. That is not a world in which I could live comfortably.
Indeed, many seem to define Musk or Vance’s position of free speech actually being free, as somehow the extreme position.
I wonder how much this cultural misunderstanding comes from Europeans not studying American history (despite constantly mocking Americans for the reverse). As I slowly make my way through the excellent biographical trilogy of Roosevelt by Morris that you recommended, it strikes me just how differently the purportedly universal western value of freedom is understood.
I remain optimistic however and hope that eventually these elites will eventually be shown the door as their increasingly terrible performance at the ballot box makes change impossible to resist!
John, Once again very diplomatic... and needed to be said. Have an enjoyable weekend.
It's Derby Day here in the USA...hats, mint juleps, and a shared cultural heritage and continuity. And let's not forget, Amazing Horses!!!! jockies and trainer's .
Hi John,
Yes, this is absolutely ridiculous. I understand that the horrors of the past must never be repeated, but this is neither the way to prevent them nor a valid excuse for what is happening now. If anything, it only adds fuel to the ultras. Are we really saying that 25% of the voting population are lunatics? Or is it more likely they feel utterly disenfranchised by the incumbents?
You are right about free speech. It is not quite the same in Europe, perhaps because of history. I agree there are worrying trends emerging that aim to monitor and control it. Interpretations may differ, but my hope is that the original shared belief in free speech helps hold things together rather than completely divide. Nothing is perfect. Still, we must call it out when it is under threat, and in this case it was right to do so. It certainly looks ugly for Germany.
I still think Merz is capable, but he needs to stand firmer on core principles. Germany cannot compete on price, but it has in areas historically led on quality and expertise, if it can still sustain them. The toothpaste has been squeezed to the end.
As for assimilation, the responsibility cuts both ways. Where is the serious strategy from politicians? You have touched on the core of it, and it remains dangerous territory even now. But it needs to be talked about, and done so rationally and openly. At present, there is no true equivalent of the American Dream in Europe.
Hi Erik. By track record, I meant Merz’s longstanding reputation for economic competence. He spent years in the Bundestag, led the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, built credibility in the private sector, and then returned. To me, that suggests a real sense of vocation. It may not be executive office, but it’s a far cry from nothing. I’d be inclined to give the chap a chance.
Why do you think Merz is capable, against the daily evidence he is not?
The last chancellor to make some step forward for Germany, was Gerhard Schroeder - now two decades ago.
Hi Erik. I am not a German national, so this is just a view from the sidelines. That said, his track record shows a strong grasp of economic policy, and I do believe he genuinely cares about Germany and the preservation of its cultural identity. From what I’ve seen, he also seems far more capable than Alice and Tino. It’s not just what he is doing, but how he compares to the alternatives. If he can shake off the Merkelism, pivot to an EROI centric energy policy, commit to meaningful and long term defence investment, and protect and revitalise what made Germany valuable today, such as its industrial and manufacturing strength, it could be a strong term in office. Here’s to hoping.
What track record?
He quit politics the past 25 years and his come-back so far was a dismal failure. Last but one election, he was booted out for an utterly incompetent CDU candidate - such a misfit I forgot his name - and the last election, he did hardly any better, in fact worse than the dismal Merkel elections and 15%-20% behind where Adenauer and Kohl routinely pumped the Union.
He's now struggled to get any handle at all on the negotiation and left the goal of the Union wide open for the SPD to kick penalties in without a goal-keeper. Even the Gruene who did not and do not participate in the coalition had more influence on the government program than the Union. How is that possible?
The Germans themselves have long since decided he is no good and he consistently fails to convince Germans he is chancellor-calibre poll after poll. The Germans don't want him.
The Union would be better off without him. NEXT!
He’s not even chancellor yet Erik! Can we give him a month or so before complete write off?
He came back to politics to "halve the AfD" - he has doubled them and is well on the way of halving the Union.
Blimey Erik, maybe he won’t even get to kick a ball afterall!
You referred to "track record" - what track record would that be?
He is not chancellor yet because of his own mistakes: he missed his pass in 2005, in 2021 and did dismally in 2025 (the election should have been in 2024).
The previous coalition did not stumble because of a good opposition but because it just managed to suck on its own so much FDP pulled the plug.
He delayed the election in 2024 as he wasn't ready; delayed the confirmation vote now as he still isn't ready and allowed the SPD and Gruene (who are not in the government even) to bake in a government agreement which offers nothing to the Union.
He has no answer whatsoever to the incredibly weak von der Leyen and ineffective EU.
His policy is more of the same that wrecked Germany and the EU.
Is Joe Biden available? Joe might be a better pick.
By track record, I meant Merz’s longstanding reputation for economic competence. He spent years in the Bundestag, led the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, built credibility in the private sector, and then returned. To me, that suggests a real sense of vocation. It may not be executive office, but it’s a far cry from nothing. I’d be inclined to give the chap a chance.
Two more datapoins:
- Reform UK from nil to highest share of vote at the UK local and by-elections.
- Simion at 41% in first round presidential election in Romania, trailing candidate at 21%.
Democracy in action! What happened in Australia? Who would’ve predicted both Aussies and Canadians backing centre left leaders? That’s two Anglosphere outfits bucking the populist trend. Didn’t expect that!
Uninspiring opposition candidate in Peter Dutton, even though those that know him know he's a decent chap and capable.
But he's considered 'Trumpian', by ignorant virtue of being slightly right of centre (although that is debatable, considering his bland policies, more likely his 9 years in the police force contributed to that image, along with his bald (skin) head - so concerned were they that they stuck a pair of spectacles on him to soften it!).
Two points I'd add:
1. In Australia they have mandatory voting, so the increasingly held view is that politicians have to be deliberately bland in order not to offend the ignorant masses who are forced to vote, else face a £50 fine (hence Dutton's blandness).
2. As Australia tends to be 5 to 10 years behind the rest of the world, they haven't worked out how awful woke is yet. Give it 3 more years and the country will probably be primed for a swing right, as mass migration continues to wreak havoc on the housing market and net zero policies continue to drive up prices.
Hi Simon, Interesting, particularly your last point about social trends and time lags. Yes, given Europe and America’s increasing desire to move on from economically ruinous green policies (even the fanatical Greta has given up, and has channeled her anti-western and anti-American behaviour towards Hamas and the Middle East) where will this leave Labour and Albanese? We shall see but they’ll have to trim the sails at some point.
Albo is not even close to awful like Starmer, and his Treasurer Jim Chalmers is capable as far as I can tell (unlike the imbecilic Rachel Reeves) - he even delivered two budget surpluses in 2023 and 24, and a tax cut - but go woke go broke, as the saying goes, so yes, let's see.
I am not sure that the difference between the USA and Europe is a different understanding or definition of "freedom".
Europe invented socialism, communism, fascism.
Just a few rare intermezzi, mostly in England & Scotland: but freedom as guiding principle for politics and social organisation is the exception rather than the rule over here.
I think there’s a strong argument that historical Europe invented the foundations of the free world. Just because its worst ideas get remembered more often doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that it also produced some of its best.
Europe invented socialism, communism and fascism and in all but the most favourable circumstances turns there to look for solutions.
Phases of freedom have been very short-lived and mostly limited in time and regionally and intellectually limited to the Anglosphere.
Maybe Switzerland is another isle of enlightenment and progress (in opposition to the German and Habsburg mainstream which it has fought off tooth and nail).
It is worth remembering that England gave the world the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, and the principle of absolute free speech in Parliament. That legacy helps explain the enduring significance of the Anglosphere.
So did other countries at around the same time by the way. The history of other countries/peoples is just less well known because we now live, clearly, in a world where the english language is dominant and that impacts the history books and academic programs too. But such treaties, between king (of whatever kind) and nobles (of whatever kind) popped up left and right in medieval Europe (Europe: true enough).
There were parliaments elsewhere. There were even elected kings (Poland) and elected emperors (Holy Roman Empire).
Feudalism showed up in Asia too (Japan comes to mind).
Perhaps Erik, others had their moments. But only England turned it into a lasting system. Magna Carta, Parliament, common law, it all stuck. While others were wiped out by kings or chaos, the English model evolved, spread across the Anglosphere, and still underpins half the free world. That I would argue is the lasting difference.
Opinion motivated by knowing little of the rest of the world - but that is everyone's prejudice.
Rome has had lasting influence.
So had the Holy Roman Empire.
Common law is not global, and French Napoléonic law reforms (the "Code") is still present in many European successor state (not just France).
Of course, Rome and the Napoleonic Code had their influence and still do, but neither gave us modern parliamentary democracy or the principle that the executive is bound by law and answerable to an elected assembly. Also, happy VE week!
Who is in charge in Germany today?
Friedrich Merkel?
Olaf Klingbeil?
Albanian pimps?
If you walk from Frankfurter Hauptbahnhof to the Opernplatz in Frankfurt-am-Main, you know the answer.
I moved out in 1996 - no regrets.
The polical "refugees" in Europe are entitled to vacation in their home countries, where they are politically persecuted, and most do holiday at home. They are certainly wealthy enough to take up that offer, given how much money they steal over here...
Germany came up with an extremely (overly) generous "Buergergeld" social security where the unemployed get paid an after tax equivalent and frequently higher income than a regular (working) employee or family.
Just a few years into the scheme: €22 billion out of €45 billion is paid to illegal immigrants.
Friedrich Merkel has no plans to review it.
Friedrich Merkel does have an alternative.
He can become Friedrich Merz. He can simply deny SPD and deny Gruene, what they like. Then, there is no government for the time being, unless SPD moves. SPD are even weaker than Union, but he has not driven that point home and picked up the bacon for his own team.
Friedrich Merkel has not extracted a single concession out of the SPD for perpetuating their cushy jobs in Berlin.
There is no federal government without CDU/CSU. He has not attempted this line. He has not used his power. He is not an apt, effective politician. That was his failure in defeating Merkel in the post Kohl period and prompted his exit then. He is equally mediocre and unfit for the job today. Fit for a debating club, but not for the real game. He is just too lazy.
He can also open the regional politics to Union/AfD coalitions. That puts a blocking minority in the Bundesrat for everything SPD wants but Union does not as federal Bundestag initiatives go nowhere in the regionally assembled Bundesrat. He is just too lazy.
Besides for critical legislation, he can craft an ad hoc single-issue Union/AfD swing majority in the federal Bundestag. The SPD and the Gruene will hate that. But whatever: there is a majority: in the Bundestag, Bundesrat and the COUNTRY AT LARGE for critical legislation. But he is just too lazy to craft it and break it out.
Compare to Trump: Trump finds a way forward for initiatives he and everyone else knows need to happen but no one of the organised forces (this includes the GOP) want. Trump is not lazy. He is fierce. He practices what Mittérand in the 90ies called: "Une majorité, ça se fait!" when Delors declined to enter the presidential election as his successor for not having a ready government to work with him.
It is really targeted defamation by the Verfassungsschutz - by the way, they are all political appointees, as are the Verfassungsrichter in Karlsruhe. They had dinner with (Angela) Merkel in the Bundeskanzlersamt the evening before issuing one of their key judgements.
Of the Verfassungsrichter: 4 are SPD, 3 are CDU and 1 is Gruen.
Enough said.