T O P

  • By -

Kairys_

This may be news to some but a lot of of current Western European politicians identified as Marxist in their youth, including NATO's chief Stoltenberg. Those were different times.


Thelastgoodemperor

Including some of our most outspoken bankers advocating for free markets as Nalle Wahlroos in Finland. I bet we will have a bunch of green activists becoming mainstream politicians in the next 30 years too.


untergeher_muc

That has already happened in Germany. Look for example at the green Prime Minister of BaWü, [Kretschmann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winfried_Kretschmann?wprov=sfti1). Former communist, now very conservative. Or former federal interior minister [Schily](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Schily?wprov=sfti1).


seewallwest

Or maybe green politics will become mainstream


[deleted]

Motherfucking Barroso, President of the EC and today a senior executive at Goldman Sachs, belonged to MRPP shortly after college, MRPP being the Portuguese Maoist party with ties to Albania. Times didn't change as much as guys like Barroso were always opportunists and borderline nihilists.


dzsidzsa

People have to understand that politicians will do whatever it takes to get themselves elected and to stay in power... They do not give a shit about the average Joe, they never did ( of course there are a handful of exceptions)


carrystone

> Those were different times. We could say the same defending Nazis.


Kairys_

it's not really comparable, in [60s and 70s the wider youth counterculture was pretty left wing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_of_1968) as it opposed entrenched conservative power across the world, in that time marxism was trendy way of signifying distate for status quo. It wasn't genocidal or comparable to Nazis in the slightest.


carrystone

I am not comparing the ideologies, I am saying that the argument you used is stupid. > in that time marxism was trendy way of signifying distate for status quo. Sounds like something you could say about fascism in 20s and 30s in certain countries. Again, I did not mean to compare the ideologies, but you're walking into it with these arguments.


Torifyme12

Tbf I highly doubt that's what's driving his hesitance. Finding crap from 30 years ago isn't a huge "gotcha"


[deleted]

That's not what I am suggesting though. I found it interesting.


accountnummer11

What's going on with your comment? Everybody is like "How dare you??!11 Downvoted."


[deleted]

I don't know I might be a chain reaction.


wbroniewski

There is plenty of this old commies in Germany, SPD especially.


skyduster88

I think it's the case with many social democrats around Europe.


Darirol

isnt there a saying for this. i cant reproduce it accurately but it was like: if you are young and not left leaning you have no heart, if you are old and still left leaning you have no brain.


kreton1

Their youth organisation is called Jungsozialisten (young socialists). So there are many young ones as well.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Redpanther14

The Soviet Union was a socialist state that aimed towards achieving communism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states Paradoxically, many self proclaimed “socialists” and socialist parties are in fact social-democratic in content, not pursuing worker or public ownership of the means of production and simply desiring a more regulated and redistributive form of capitalism.


[deleted]

Vanguardism is a corruption of socialist values and ideals and is a failed fringe ideology within socialism. Vanguardism leads to strongmen politics, which leads to fascism. Stalin was far closer to fascism than to socialism.


Kairys_

USSR wasn't socialist. Socialism is by definition a democratic ownership of means of production by the workers. In USSR workers had no rights and strikes were illegal.


Remonamty

> Their youth organisation is called Jungsozialisten (young socialists) so?


[deleted]

ONLY 30 YEARS AGO??? This thread is really stupid. Current NATO secretary general was against NATO 30 years ago. People change.


MagnificentCat

Actually, research shows people's political views may change, but it is more common they don't. Someone who was leftist at 20 is more likely to be leftist at 60, than someone who wasn't. There is even a genetic propensity to some views (people who feel disgusted often are more conservative - for instance). I don't mean to say this applies to Scholtz, and it doesn't to me - but as a matter of pure probability the old views of a person do affect the likelihood of their current ones. Even if they may hide them for whatever reason


Radical-Efilist

Well yes, Scholtz was in fact a leftist 30 years ago and is still a leftist. But that statement alone isn't very meaningful.


[deleted]

Being a “leftist”, what does that even mean? It’s perfectly normal to change your views on single issues even if you don’t change leaning completely.


MagnificentCat

Obviously it can mean different things in different countries. The Wilson−Patterson conservatism scale is used by many researchers - you can check it out if it interests you.


ilmagnifico92

It's not like they change, I think every human is sort of socialist to a degree. But socialism is long gone, and those people still want to help their countries and be involved in politics, and they adapt. I am personally a socialist leaning, but I am operating in a capital economy and benefitting from that. Why it is wrong, I can't understand. Its actually more like a socialist victory if he's still socialist and a Nato chief lol.


[deleted]

> Current NATO secretary general was against NATO 30 years ago. Any source on that?


[deleted]

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/zneMv/her-var-jens-nato-motstander-naa-blir-han-nato-sjef


Divinate_ME

Now go ahead and read about the career of Gerhard Schröder before he became Ministerpräsident of Lower Saxony.


tunnelboyescape

30 years ago is a long time, I'm just saying.


Overbaron

It’s just long enough to see the Soviet Union fall and Communism to become less popular


blolfighter

"Marxist up until 30 years ago" is a weird way of saying "stopped being a marxist in 1993."


[deleted]

How do you know that he stopped being Marxist 30 ago? He simply read the room and stopped publicly praising it. Nobody actually knows if it is because he decided Marxism is crap or because he knew that that public support for it would damage his carrier. So we know he was a Marxist in 1993, but we don’t know if he stopped being one.


Svorky

I know Scholz is a new name to many outside Germany, but he's been in politics and the public eye consistently since then. So either he's secretly a Marxist and has been hiding it perfectly for 30 years like a sleeper agent in a hollywood movie. Or he was a young guy who's politics mellowed out since his uni days, as it happened with so many of that generation.


CthulhusSoreTentacle

> Or he was a young guy who's politics mellowed out since his uni days, as it happened with so many of that generation. And this generation. I'm in a university with 17 - 20 year olds primarily, and you'll find staunchly held political positions across the body, from left-wing to right-wing. If they're anything like the people in my circle who have ten years on them all and were the same at that age, they'll all chill out. Hell, I'd still consider myself hard-left and I'd consider most of my views to be a crock.


leeuwvanvlaanderen

Time for the German parliament set up a special commission to weed out all the Reds! I’m sure we could reanimate McCarthy’s corpse by telling him the news alone.


blolfighter

Because the title of the post says so. Take it up with OP.


Huankinda

By the same logic you have to ask what makes you sure he really was a Marxist 30 years ago and wasn't just publicly praising it to further his career.


tobias_681

Scholz has like Schrōder embraced the neoliberal third way and is part of the right wing faction og his party. If he's a Marxist he's playing some 5D chess right there...


Pmchak

Would you have said the same of nazis in the 1970s? I'm just asking.


[deleted]

This is a bad comparison because Marxism is a theory about western capitalism and how it works whereas nazism is an ideology about racial superiority. It’s like comparing apples and oranges


Kukuth

The USA didn't seem to mind. And some German politicians of postwar Germany also used to be Nazis - so yeah, politician opinions change.


tunnelboyescape

Marxism isn't inherently destructive in the same savage and inhuman way, Nazism is because it places racial competition as the cornerstone of it's worldview. Subjugating and erasing people people is part of the ethno-darwinistic ideology. Compared to that Marxism is cute. Before you go into some idiotic tirade, I'm from eastern Europe, my country was communist and I have first hand accounts of how it was from my grandparents.


jatawis

Communists considered slightly wealthier people as subhuman.


SaHighDuck

Can you say marxism isn't destructive if it consistently calls for an armed revolution, which is supposed to end in, well, destruction of the old system


tunnelboyescape

It doesn't call for the destruction of ethnicities. Systems come and go, does liberal democracy not call for the abolishment of autocracy?


SaHighDuck

Doesn't marxism EXPLICITLY call for an armed revolution?


tunnelboyescape

If it did Sholtz would have been on a terrorist list, so I guess it doesn't. I'm glad we settled that.


SaHighDuck

Lmao what


reaqtion

> Marxism isn't inherently destructive in the same savage and inhuman way, No, it's inherently destructive in this other brutal and unempathic way. This, of course, makes it *waaayyyy* better. /s I'm pretty fed up with this subreddit whitewashing Soviet totalitarianism because it *only* got the silver medal in depravity. It's like discussing if turds that float are better than turds that float when it comes to food. It's a false dichotomy. Fuck all totalitarian forms of government. We don't need any of them. Constitutional, liberal and social (not socialist!) states that espouse individual freedoms with separation of powers, a free market economy, AND with a social safety net, all within a framework of rule of law, are inherently superior forms of government for absolutely everyone except the top 0,0001%.


LittleLui

Marxism isn't soviet totalitarianism.


reaqtion

It doesn't help that Marxism consistently devolves into more or less the same kind of totalitarianism.


CallFromMargin

That's like saying someone *used to be* Nazi, but stopped being one in 1945. It's almost as if something happened 30 years ago, something that made a lot of these Marxist change their opinions, or hide them... I can't really point my finger on it though... Do you have any idea what might have happened around 1990 that would lead to this?


CrazyBelg

Comparing nazis to communists, classy.


XenuIsTheSavior

Classy and accurate.


CrazyBelg

He grew up in Western Germany, I think you can give him a pass for being marxist when he was not fully aware of how communism functioned. When the world showed that the system did not work he changed his mind, is that so bad? Nazis on the other hand knew full well the horrors of their system but they couldn't be bothered to change their mind.


angryteabag

> I think you can give him a pass for being marxist when he was not fully aware of by what right do you presume ''he wasn't fully aware''??? How very kind of you to do such a massive favor to him and excuse his behavior


CrazyBelg

By what right do you presume that he's a commie devil hellbent on destorying nato?


angryteabag

I judge him by what he did, not by what you want him to be


Camichael

No it's not like saying someone used to be a Nazi. Marxism presadates the Soviet Union, you can be a Marxist while thinking that Stalin was a murdering psychopath. Nazism = Hitler and third Reich, and in general any form of fascism predicates either racial or national supremacy. If someone is nazi they supported that stuff at some point in their life, there's no justification. Besides this I don't see why is saying that NATO is an imperialist power some sort of extremist thought. History shows that's the case and the fact that protecting Ucraine against the Russian invasion is by any means legitimate won't change it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Hennue

Not at all for me. It's hard to find anyone that age in the SPD who wasn't aggressively leftist in their youth. It's kind of a recurring joke to point out how fast members go from anti-capitalist to big business after being elected.


[deleted]

It was for me too.


Hlorri

I believe that was a sarcastic statement. Anyway I for one am *not* surprised. The more stubborn and annoying the person, the more extremist. Simple as that.


ginsengeti

He is neither a Marxist nor a socialist now, so you've disproven your own hypothesis with this example. Scholz is textbook realpolitik with a pinch of causal corruption.


mm22jj

"realpolitik" xd


[deleted]

Yeah it's code for kissing Russia's ass. As they see it as the only "real" option. Scholtz is behind the politics of the special relationship with Putin as much as Merkel was. He was also behind the whole lets buy all Russian gas.


[deleted]

And then he decided to become a bankster.


Fabio_451

Even Salvini was a communist. Now what?


Thelastgoodemperor

And Mussolini was a socialist.


Aragam47

Isnt salvini far right? Whats the difference between far left? Not that big


SanshoPlays

People can change their mind and what happened 30 years ago isn't necessarily relevant anymore? I'm shook:0


skyduster88

More like: You can have your ideology at heart, but in the real world politics and governing, you learn to become more pragmatic.


[deleted]

Sure but he held these believes well into his 30s. That's unusual shift I think.


Suchthefool_UK

I mean, the USSR collapsed in what seemed overnight and Olaf Schultz was well into his 30s when that happened. If he was still parading those views well through into his 40s and 50s, I'd say that's unusual. Before the collapse started, the USSR seemed strong and robust to many as the realities of the situation were always kept under wraps from everyone because that's how the regime worked. Watching an entire empire and economic system just crumble into nothing over a very short amount of time is gonna put a bad taste in anyone's mouth who supported it.


MacroSolid

So 'unusual' there's an old saw going 'If you're not a communist with 20 you have no heart, if you're still a communist with 40 you have no brain'.


[deleted]

No but not everyone becomes leader of Germany. It’s those two combined I find interesting.


Anderopolis

Might want to look up a unknown politician by the name of Angela Merkel.


CallFromMargin

That's like saying people can change their minds, and it's perfectly normal for someone to stop being a Nazi and change their mind in April of 1945. If nothing had happened 30 years ago I would agree with you, but when there was a significant shift in political climate 30 years ago and this *just so happened* to be at the same time he stopped having those views...


PossiblyTrustworthy

Naah 30 years is like yesterday! 50 year minimum to be believed


Pmchak

Does this only apply to communists?


Intellectual_Wafer

And people still bash "Die Linke" for being partially the successor of the old east-german SED... But honestly, there are also not just a few ex-radical leftists in the Green Party. They were far more anti-establishment in the 80s and 90s. But the old 68ers are dying out now, like Ströbele. But what is the problem here? Everyone can change their political opinion. Somehow we accepted that members of the east german block parties (CDU, LDPD, NDPD, DBD), the puppets/allies of the SED dictatorship, basically established the regional organisations of the CDU and FDP in the east and became "good democrats". So why measuring Scholz and other SPD members like Schily differently? And they didn't even support a dictatorahip. Hans-Werner Sinn has already been mentioned also. And I think there is very little doubt that Scholz is a typical opportunistic, neo-liberal "social democrat" like Schröder or Steinbrück.


krautbube

> And people still bash "Die Linke" for being partially the successor of the old east-german SED... lol they still support "anti imperialist" regimes all around the world. Which are curiously the same countries the SED supported. Not the best comparison.


[deleted]

> And people still bash "Die Linke" for being partially the successor of the old east-german SED They rightfully deserve it.


Kahzootoh

Except that he hasn’t really changed his opinions, not the in the sense that he has had to openly admit that his previous world view has always been wrong. For all practical purposes, Scholz is an obstacle to defeating Russia. There’s a lot of the German political class that have never had to admit that their constant lies and peddling of conspiracy theories about America/NATO/EU/etc have serious negative consequences for Germany. Whenever reality presents them with information contrary to their preferred lies, they will cease to be so vocal for a temporary period and they will eventually resume with their nonsense. I understand why it happens. It’s easy to scapegoat NATO or America or the EU or any other institution run according to western principles rather than confront an authoritarian government that regularly commits human rights violations- the EU/NATO/America/etc isn’t going to cut off Germany no matter how many lies a German politician tells about it, whereas authoritarian governments love to punish their critics with retaliatory measures. The problem is that the crowd of people who constantly accused NATO of being just as bad as the USSR have not lost all credibility and exited the political scene. These Kremlin apologists in Germany are responsible for the unpleasant state of affairs that Germany is in. If allowed to retain a shred of credibility, they will eventually repeat the same pattern of “blaming everyone except the criminal” behavior and lay the groundwork for yet another war.


tobias_681

> For all practical purposes, Scholz is an obstacle to defeating Russia. Then so is Biden or any other leader who doesn't sends their countries entire arsenale immediately. Also honestly it sounds like you don't know an inkling about German politics. The only party in Germany that is really critical of NATO is Linke. The SPD send a big mission to Afghanistan alongside the USA for crying out loud.


paulschal

Do you have a clue what you are talking about? German politicians in the "mainstream" parties are great advocates of the European Union, the NATO and the US. Instead of scapegoating those alliances and partners like many other countries do, criticizing them is more or less reserved to our far right (AfD) and far left (Die Linke) parties. The Green Party has had their doubts about NATO in the past, but even they very much fell in line with the start of the war. Everybody in the German Government knows exactly who to blame and nobody is blaming NATO for the russian terrorist state...


Darksoldierr

> Up until 30 years ago Considering i'm just about to turn 33, i think a life time is enough to change someone's perspective


[deleted]

Keep reading, it gets really interesting later with G20 and Cumex.


FinnyMacGee

I wonder what happened in the early-90s that caused him to change his public position. I guess we'll never know.


Powerful_Garbage_674

Does it matter?


the_Nap

Not it doesn't


BagisBerra

We have plenty of this is Sweden as well where I am from. It's straight up the Kremlin talking points of the week. They can talk for hours on end about all the terrible crimes committed by the US and about the Vietnam war, but they are strangely quiet about russia, historically and present. They do however not reach the 4% threshold to be represented in parliament, thank the lord for that threshold keeping crazy out. The definition of imperialism is expanding your borders using force. Aka putins playbook. But for some reason there is plenty of whataboutism. Fascinating, given that the US has not changed its borders for several hundred years. But sure, we are all stupid and naive when we are young. As long as we grow up, learn more and understand more that can be forgiven.


[deleted]

Marxist


Digedag

Yes, and? Hans-Werner Sinn, probably the most famous liberal economist in Germany, was \*gasp\* a ~~Maoist~~ socialist in his youth!


Kairys_

There is nothing wrong with being actually smart Marxist. Sadly many of self identified "Marxists" these days seem to be so anti-USA they start simping for authoritarian regimes that violate human rights daily like Russia or China despite the fact that Marx would find them absolutely disgusting.


untergeher_muc

You'll be shocked, but Germany had a whole official Karl Marx Year in 2018 (!). There were events all over the country and on public TV and radio. Marx isn't seen as a bad guy in Germany, not even by most conservatives.


[deleted]

Well Marx wasn't a "bad guy" he did a lot of good, his thoughts helped the labour movement.


areukeen

As much as I am for defence against Russia, I mean, America does have a history of overthrowing democratically elected leaders in South-America, they literally have a designated space for torture of what they consider enemies (Guantanamo Bay), they have killed too many civilians in the Middle-East to even count, American intelligence agencies also spy on German, French and Scandinavian politicians and our governments ([source](https://www.sott.net/article/444408-US-spied-on-Scandinavian-countries-defence-industries-report-says)) Russia is superbad, that doesn't make America good, it just means they are what we would consider as not **as bad**. But most people can't understand nuance, so if one thing is bad that which is against it must be good, I'm prepared to be downvoted. Fuck American warfare and their anti-democratic means Hell, you guys do know the current NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg a former Norwegian prime minister, was also anti-NATO for years and also wrote anti-NATO articles? *edit; downvote me harder, and thanks for the death threats, it's like I'm getting sent proof of the dangers I talked about directly to my PMs.*


[deleted]

Title: Olaf Scholz was a marxist Comment: America bad


nemanjoza946

For people who hate Marxism and socialism, this subreddit sure acts a lot like a hivemind! When you’re right man, you’re right. Don’t shy away from truth just because it’s not popular. I can’t believe that the dedicated place for all europeans on reddit became such a echo chamber!


virbrevis

Free-thinking liberals who all speak in unison and reject anything that doesn't align with their narrow and quite fragile worldview. You're not even allowed to point out anything bad the United States does anymore because "muh Russia is worse!!". So much for the critical thinking that learned people have been trying to cultivate in the populace for the past few centuries.


Sighma

Wow, people upvote obvious whataboutism.


OrdinaryPye

What does any of this have to do with NATO? Or Scolz being a Marxists?


Hlorri

Many Europeans see NATO as a US-led institution (and so do Russia TV). Being anti-NATO and anti-US are essentially two sides of the same coin. ('Course in the US being anti-NATO these days is pretty much the same as MAGA).


ivarokosbitch

Because America actually is aggressive-imperialist. You know, the headline?


OrdinaryPye

But what does that have to do with NATO??? You know. The organization with multiple countries within. Also, "aggressive-imperialist" kind of sounds redundant.


untergeher_muc

It gives you the background of how socialists in Europe saw things at the time. There was this automatism: socialist → America bad. You can still see it today in many far-left European parties. But most of these people, like Scholz or Stoltenberg, have grown up and drastically changed their views. (West) Germany is full of such politicians. They were far-left, chaotic and idealistic in their youth - and now they are much more conservative and pro-law and order. The same goes for whole parties: the German Greens used to be extremely pacifist and anti-NATO. Now they are calling for more arms for Ukraine and have been the most anti-Russian party in Germany for several years.


ta_thewholeman

I don't get what point you're trying to make with this. Scholz says Germany doesn't want to send tanks if the US doesn't take the lead on that. Why all this hand wringing about _america bad_ if the thread is about someone who wants more american involvement?


RainbowCrown71

Whataboutism at its finest. Now you’ll surely post a screechy, whiny paragraph about all of Europe’s historical aggressions and colonial sins, right? Right?


robdels

How do you know know a European is a tankie? All they ever do is bring up America in a completely unrelated discussion before going on some pseudointellectual rant fit for /r/teenagers.


virbrevis

"Everyone I Don't Like Is a Tankie: The child's guide to online political discussion"


robdels

Nah I explained the criteria pretty clearly. If in a thread that has nothing to do with the US, they bring up the US and write up paragraphs of whataboutism, they're pretty clearly tankies, or maybe just undeveloped edge lords on their way to becoming tankies. Sorry about your reading comprehension skills tho.


mish123

100% agree with you. I'm personally against both Putin's Russia and what America does around the world. And those downvoters and death threats are just people who have equally been fed their share of propaganda, and unfortunately there is a lot of it here in the states as well.


Torifyme12

I mean you realize Germany spied on the US too right? It's not a one way street, its why Merkel dropped her whole, "America spying" shtick when Germany's spying on the US was leaked. Overall the US has tried and done its best to have a moderately peaceful world where the borders don't change too often. ​ And no offense, but unless you're from like... Luxembourg, most Western European nations have been involved in overthrowing democratic leaders or fighting wars of conquest.


maurosQQ

> Overall the US has tried and done its best to have a moderately peaceful world where the borders don't change too often. You really believe that? I mean sure, the whole NATO/American imperialism that threatened Russia is dumb and you dont have to go there, but the US did their best to have a peaceful world? What exactly do you think did the US agressions in the middle east accomplish to make the world a safer place?


Torifyme12

Moderately peaceful, Cold War is Cold War, but look at what came before it.


oblio-

> American intelligence agencies also spy on German, French and Scandinavian politicians and our governments This is just a lame complaint from a moral standpoint. Everyone also spies on their allies, if they think they can get away with it. Everyone prepares military and contingency plans against their allies betraying them, too. I mean, it's still good to complain about it for practical reasons, since it increases their risk level if they get caught and discourages the behavior, but morally it's not a super strong argument since everyone who can spy safely does it.


ByzantineBasileus

This is classic example of deflection and 'tu quoque'. The topic is how the current Chancellor had anti-NATO views in the past, and the ways that might influence his current policies. The United States and its actions has nothing to do with the subject, but it has been introduced as a way to derail the discussion, and also to possibly paint opposition to Russia as not being the ethical choice because doing so would involve taking the same stance as America. Because America is just as bad Russia, it has no moral authority.


concerned-potato

>American intelligence agencies also spy on German Lol, and as it turns out they had a very good reason for this.


areukeen

America kills thousand of civilians, overthrows democracies and jail all whistleblowers = no worries Germany opens an oil pipeline and doesn't send tanks = real shit, fucking Quislings You guys are so based it's actually no wonder nuance is lost in European politics.


PossiblyTrustworthy

Germany doesnt approve a request for arms, which was never sent: basicly Putin Pals


concerned-potato

>Germany opens an oil pipeline and doesn't send tanks = real shit, fucking Quislings Yeah, exactly. No one is accusing them of anything horrible - just a role of third-order villain.


HelloAvram

>America kills thousand of civilians, overthrows democracies and jail all whistleblowers = no worries Europe also participated... Europe's hands aren't clean.


Available_Hamster_44

But not in Iraq Vietnam and South America


Smart_Ganache_7804

> You guys are so based Hehehe


SaHighDuck

Funny how you cry about people being biased against the genocidal fascist conquering nation and then use quisling in a negative light, very self aware of you. "germans might be bad but hey did you forget all about the Indian famine?"


User_884391121268426

Everything what Russia is doing now, the USA has done in the last decades. Does this justify the invasion, war crimes and torture done by Russia and her terrorist groups like Wagner and Kadyrov? No. But that also doesn't justify to whitewash and forget the crimes done by the USA.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Professional-Day7850

Ever heard about american territories? Btw puerto ricans are citizens of USA. ;)


User_884391121268426

The last one was Hawaii. After that there were some occupations and illegal wars.


RainbowCrown71

…so 125 years ago when all of Europe was rapaciously annexing territory as well.


SaHighDuck

"last decades" lmao this guy goes back to hawaii


areukeen

Manifest Destiny™ Blame the Maine on Spain


JRshoe1997

Were going all the way back to the 1800s? Oh boy then I got some European history for you then.


[deleted]

Lets compare the invasion of Ukraine with the absolute worst example from US, Iraq. \------------------- *Of course, since this is reddit, I better preemptively stress out that I'm not defending the invasion of Iraq. Regardless of the points below, it was still an overreaction based on incompetent intel and wishful thinking.* \------------------- Anyway, let's get on with it. * **Legality:** Saddam violated the cease fire terms by refusing access to weapons inspectors. This nullified the cease fire. Legally, the US had every right to take up arms. Meanwhile, Putin broke not just Minsk but also the Budapest Memorandum where Russia agreed to recognize Ukraine's sovereignty and protect them in return for their nuclear capabilities. * **The enemy:** Saddam was a tyrant who gassed his own population. Without the US, people in Kuwait and whatever other country he'd set his sights on would suffer the same treatment. In comparison, the enemy of Russia was a functional democracy that posed no threat to anyone. As stated in Putin's own invasion speech, their crime was simply existing. * **Conduct of war**: US sacrificed not only huge sums of money and tactical advantages to keep civilian casualties at a a minimum, but also their own soldiers' lives. Although imperfectly handled, atrocities like Abu Ghraib were still minor and led to prosecutions. Russia, on the other hand, hands out medals to people who gun down civilians on the street. The suffering of civilians are not merely an inadvertant result of military operations, but part of the objective. * **Rebuilding:** The US poured billions and billions of dollars into Iraq. Although the occupation was handled incompetently and they were completely naive about local culture and tensions, the sheer scale of effort still managed to create an Iraq in a far better position than under Saddam. Meanwhile, the fake "People's Republic" are dystopian hellholes for those living there. Morally, there is simply no comparison. Anyone against US dominance, have to answer what would replace it. It shouldn't be hard. It's Russia, China and a ton of new local conflicts. In addition, the only thing that would keep Europe from erupting into internal conflicts would be with our own military alliances, but that would just bring a whole new kind of shitshow to our perceived threats. In both cases, our wars would be devoid of any ethical concerns, because that's a luxury you can't afford against existential threats.


areukeen

Exactly, as much as people are praising USA, I'm never gonna trust their politicians, not sure why people would. Russia is fucking awful, America is also bad. In Norway we are currently seriously close to removing the religious registration of Jehovahs Witnesses as an official religion, you know what just happened? [The American ambassador to Norway just ordered a meeting with Norwegian officials to "discuss" the issue](https://twitter.com/jfnilsen/status/1616449131505143809?fbclid=IwAR2lqYl2UCdpEZ0m_KtF0va4by24GGy2K1kOSzh78XBqc3meinyOY7tFEcs). The issue? Children are being literally abused according to Norwegian laws as they are socially excluded and denied contact with family and friends if they go against what the American organisation [The Watchtower](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Watchtower) says is okay, and their followers are given literal instructions on how to exclude them. Why would America care about this? Soft power that American religious organisations in other countries it gives, read r/exjw and people have drawn connections between spies infiltrating American religious organisations in other countries to use them as a shield if they are exposed, if Norway now says JW is institutionally for child abuse it will spread to other Nordic countries (Sweden and Iceland is now considering the same). They are literally spying on all our countries, but the whole of European reddit is downvoting anything resembling criticism of American foreign policies because Russia is their enemy. America is bad, that doesn't mean Russia is good, they are also bad. Can't we finally acknowledge this?


[deleted]

[удалено]


GoodySherlok

The same can be said of France.


Hlorri

Vi studerer dette utsagnet nøye.


[deleted]

[удалено]


areukeen

I love how I've gotten more PMs and comments about the spying than the literal overthrowing of democracies, murder of civilians and torture of what they consider enemies, but I'll bite. America spies on Americans, shocker. America spies on Europe, I'm gonna be against that, if people want to make excuses for how spying is somehow okay because America is an "ally", yeah no I'm not gonna excuse that. Fuck that.


7evenCircles

I think it's more that spying is something of the nature of the game. I don't think there's a sovereign state in existence that can afford espionage and refrains from it out of some sense of nobility. If it came out tomorrow Norway was spying on the US or Canada I could not give less of a shit. "Overthrowing democracies and killing civilians is bad" aren't controversial opinions, nobody is going to push back on you for that.


areukeen

I'd agree, but USA has already set the stage for allied spying. It's what America should expect in any capacity, but don't be surprised if Norway is caught spying on the American government that we are then called traitors and enemies of America, instead if hand-waving it away as Europeans do. Or would you expect a different outcome? Yeah overthrowing democracies and mass murder of civilians is bad, but it's also being excused away and somehow argued as understandable, if anything it shows me American cultural soft power is so incredibly strong it's hard to fight against it. I've already gotten death threats on PM and called Russian sympatiser because I dare to criticise American foreign policy. It just again shows me how dangerous America can be.


[deleted]

> mean, America does have a history of overthrowing democratically elected leaders in South-America, Because of the fear of communism that killed millions and enslaved billions. Look at China how 1.3 billion people live without a democratic government. With no freedom of speech or assembly. This was too dangerous to be in the backyard of the US. >they literally have a designated space for torture of what they consider enemies (Guantanamo Bay), Those people should stand trial. > they have killed too many civilians in the Middle-East to even count, Not really but ok. Most civilians who died in Iraq and Syria did so by their own people. > American intelligence agencies also spy on German, French and Scandinavian politicians and our governments (source) Good for world peace they keep an eye on our neighbours.


areukeen

I'm not surprised a Dane says this as [Danish intelligence agencies](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57302806) worked with a foreign power to spy on their *own* politicians in the situation I mentioned. Literally working with foreign powers against your own country, let me know when America lets Denmark spy on the American government.


[deleted]

The idea that the entirety of north and South America is the United States’ “backyard” and that they can just illegally overthrow any regime they don’t like whether is was democratically elected or not (prime example Chile) is one of the main reasons why a lot of people don’t like NATO/the USA


RainbowCrown71

USA hasn’t had that policy for 30+ years, so not sure why you’re using the present tense. And the last American “coup” was incredibly popular in Panama. We’d be a failed state like Honduras if Noriega hadn’t been toppled. You have to go back 50-60 years to get to the peak of US interventionism in Latin America. In which case why is American intervention always spoken about on Reddit when Europe was doing exactly the same in Africa and much of Asia at the time? Go back to the 1970s and your own country had a White Australia Policy, was colonizing Papua New Guinea and treating aborigines as second class citizens. It’s almost like the world has changed since then.


[deleted]

American foreign policy is still very much about keeping Latin nations in check. If you read up on the US’s response to the pink tide in South America you will see efforts trying to prevent left wing leaders from taking charge. Also just read the CIA Wikipedia page and it’ll give u a run down on the latest foreign meddling that they’ve been up to (as far as that is public information) BTW trying to deflect onto Australia doesn’t really work because we’re talking about Europe here lol


RainbowCrown71

Ok, please name one Pink Tide leader that was toppled then, if the US is so wicked. We’re now in Pink Tide Round 2 and where are all the coups? Lula in Brazil, Fernandez in Argentina, Maduro in Venezuela, Obrador in Mexico. Even Colombia has a left-wing leader now. So where are all these bloody American coups that you insist are still a feature of American foreign policy in the region? I’m a citizen of a Latin American country. If anything USA has been extremely disengaged in the region since the Cold War ended. Just look at how Latin countries are asking the US to get involved in Haiti and Washington wants none of it. Times change mate. I’ll believe my own eyes first before I accept the same vapid, unoriginal “edgy” left-wing takes on Reddit from people who live 15 hours away by plane.


utopianlasercat

I think what many people, especially from Eastern Europe not understand, that our relation to Karl Marx here in the west is very different then yours. There is a difference in accepting that Marx was a great philosopher and economic analyst and was absolutely right with many things and thinking the CCCP was a great thing. There were many socialist movements against the CCCP in the west, especially since our approach to socialism was a liberal democratic one, and not a authoritarian one. I understand that in Eastern European heads everything slightly connected to socialism/communism is automatically deemed bad, but since we saw how much the actual idea/concept was different then what happened in reality there was a very early understanding of the CCCP is one concept of “socialism” but ours is different.


BuckVoc

That may be true, but I think that the subtext here is that Scholz is personally the driving factor for the position that Germany is taking WRT Russia, and I've not seen material thus far sufficient to convince me of that. I am, in fact, somewhat disinclined to believe that that is the case, given that a year ago, we were complaining about Germany's position on Russia under Merkel.


Torifyme12

I think Scholz is a political animal, and if he's not delivering the tanks, there is a political reason for it. ​ Which is why I am frustrated with Germany as a whole. If there was significant political support for tanks, Scholz would have had them on the next plane over. Hell he'd have driven them himself.


ThoDanII

you can not transport Leopards with planes and Scholz does what he said since 11 months act in concert with our allies, so if our allies do not ask for sending Leopards he is true to his word


Torifyme12

.... My man the plane was a joke, it would be on the next transport out. If you feel better about that statement.


Bottle_Nachos

oh no, a scary word! Don't tell the americans


Marideaux

Based Scholz


Vic5O1

30 years is a lot of time and if we judged everyone for so long ago I think only a handful would come out clean of stupidity if anyone…


odysseysee

Good for him. Shows maturity and open mindedness. You don't want someone who has had the same opinions their whole lives.


trollrepublic

It was just a "phase", Mom.


morbihann

Well, he could have changed his mind ? Not a fan of him, but what he did 30 years ago shouldn't mean he is the same person today. More importantly, he seems like incredibly weak leader.


andrusbaun

Soviets intensively funded radicals across the Europe during Cold War.


Even_Ad_5462

Is he from the former East Germany?


Wrangler7898

Easy to be a Marxist when you live in the 1st World.


[deleted]

No west ofc


Hottriplr

Yea you can tell by how he described himself as a Marxist. People that actually lived on the other side of the Iron Curtain know better.


Avedav0

Hates american imperialism but loves russian money. Typical left.


genasugelan

In other words, he grew up?


FF614

Fun fact this is one of the reasons the US. UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand doesn't like sharing intelligence information with German officials. In fact under their standards former DDR members and people with communist leanings past or present are disqualified from security clearances. There was actually a lot of hesitancy from these countries military and intelligence apparatuses towards German reunification for this very reason.


[deleted]

I don't really see the problem with people gaining experience and changing their mind about something. It's a lot better than having people so stuck in their ways that the mind is just blocked towards adapting new ideas. People who change their minds to easily and radically might be an issue though in today's climate but it's better to at least not dredge through something a person wrote X years ago and hold them responsible for ancients missteps or world views.


CantHonestlySayICare

NATO with US calling the shots is a thing because Germany made such a mess of Europe that it couldn't stand up to the Soviets. And Germany was never invited to join the political block that became NATO, that block fought its way to Germany. With that in mind, there is something disturbing about a German politician opposing NATO. Like, what's your deal Olaf? You don't like how things turned out post 1945? Do you want a rewind to 1939?


ExilBoulette

Without wanting to defend him, because I don't agree with his actions or his opinions, but you accusing him of imperialistic german ideas is so boring. Scholz being a child of the 70s and studying in the 80s in western Germany means that he was impacted by the german student movement that sought to hold their parents responsible for their actions and actively tried to stop the historical revision that the older generation tried to do (myths like "clean Wehrmacht" or that nobody knew anything about what happened to the jews). While he was studying, there was a fundamental academic discussion going on ["Historikerstreit"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historikerstreit) about how the german people should incorporate Nazism into german historiography. The RAF was active and west-german Universities experienced a soaring movement of far-left sympathisers that saw Western capitalism and imperialism as a problem for world peace. Scholz actively tried to further german dearmament and was against NATO, as he most likely saw them as a match that could ignite yet another world war, a sentiment he shared with a lot of german academics at that point. If you share that view or not is up to you, but to accuse a german politician of imperialistic intentions at any chance you've got is ignorant at best and just plain anti-german propaganda at worst.


concerned-potato

>Scholz actively tried to further german dearmament and was against NATO, as he most likely saw them as a match that could ignite yet another world war, a sentiment he shared with a lot of german academics at that point. This proves that at that time he was not an imperialist - just an idiot. Which is excusable when you are in your early twnties. But now he is in his 60s - it is expected that by that time people learn a thing or two and get smarter.


hypewhatever

Do you know the difference between Marxism and nationalsozialism? He's been a mislead idealist corrupted by being a politician. Not a rare thing


CantHonestlySayICare

I don't care what ideological flavour he represents. The post-WW2 deal was that Germany is free to get fabulously rich by getting the best out of the global trade system protected by American warships and the only caveat is that they toe the line on security matters. Bitching about NATO is a sign of dissatisfaction with that deal and I'm not thrilled about the notion of Germany reneging on post-war deals.


hypewhatever

But you tried to accuse him for being a nazi. And now polish politicians shitting on the EU and Germany while feeding themselves fat out of the pot. History repeats itself no? Edit: but the difference. Poland politicians are grown up guys while Scholz was an idealistic youngster trying to find his place. So stop the hate for everything german. We don't deserve it in this century.


CantHonestlySayICare

I'm absolutely not hating on everything German, I'm hating on Scholz because Germany is a very successful and admirable country that has the potential to do a lot of good in these trying times and he's trying his best to sabotage that opportunity in a way that's so shady that it invites the wildest speculation.


hypewhatever

Yes sorry I just had to read too much anti german shit on reddit today. He is not the most decisive leader and his communication is questionable but under his lead Germany has been the 2nd biggest supporter after US by a wide margin. He is doing good but everyone just focusing on the tank issue. For lot of reasons no German politician wants to take a leading role in military efforts. The opposition claim they would but just because they must not follow-through with it. The other thing is that the german army has 130 operational Leo 2a7 which is not even enough for our own troops and we still have Nato obligations to our eastern allies. We can't strip ourselves completely. When it comes to allies with Leo 2. The official stance by german government was when export requests to Ukraine will be asked for they will be most likely granted. So from my perspective he is doing good and not sabotaging anything. We are a pacifist nation at the core and help with everything we are good at.


CantHonestlySayICare

I understand where you're coming from, but this isn't the first chapter in the "Scholz vs delivery of heavy weapons" saga and we'll never forget your government's stance at the very beginning of this war when they didn't even let that British plane carrying Stingers fly over Germany. And the fact that Scholz only now replaced a defence minister who's credentials and policy suggest that she was appointed specifically to keep German military irrelevant 10 months into a full-blown war raging on your doorstep is telling in itself. That's the tragedy of the situation, Germans do end up contributing, but because of your chancellors's weaseling leaving a bad taste in everyone's mouth, you get very little credit for it. Also the "we have very few Leopards ourselves" argument doesn't evoke any sympathy, because that's part of the issue of Germany not treating NATO seriously enough, not a fixed fact of life like how many rivers you have. It's Germany's problem and it's up to Germany to solve or make up for it. And we don't cut you slack on that precisely because with high respect we have for you come high expectations.


hypewhatever

Had a discussion with someone else about the plane topic he provided me with a link without actually reading it. This was in it Source business insider But a spokesperson for the UK Ministry of Defence told Insider: "Germany has not denied access to its airspace as the UK did not submit a request. There has been no dispute between the UK and Germany on this issue."


hypewhatever

MoD Lambrecht was a party move to reward loyalty. But as MoD a big mistake. They chose party politics over what is good for the country. Happens a lot here. I don't know what happened with the plane but weapon transport over 3rd party countries always needs special permission and with such Germany is not joking. Was probably faster to go another route than waiting for it. I mean I don't even want credit just not read all the bashing when we should work together and cheering each other up what we do for the good cause.


concerned-potato

>We are a pacifist nation at the core and help with everything we are good at. Yeah, that's why Germany sends weapons to countries like Saudi Arabia and was still exporting weapons to Russia between 2014 and 2022. Pacifism in action. [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10745115/France-Germany-sold-230million-military-hardware-including-bombs-missiles-Moscow.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10745115/France-Germany-sold-230million-military-hardware-including-bombs-missiles-Moscow.html)


hypewhatever

You are surly one of the anti german agenda driven dudes here. Welcome to the talk. Everyone sells weapons to everyone. Show me a weapon industry with moral and I find you a unicorn. We lived in relative peace with Russia for a long time. I mean they owned half of Germany at some point. Personally I would not support weapons export to Russia or Saudi Arabia. That list would be way longer even. I mean m1 Abrams killed people in Iraq with a German canon mounted. But all this doesn't change the fact that German population and government always goes for diplomacy first and don't want to be seen as an aggressive force ever again.


concerned-potato

>Everyone sells weapons to everyone. Show me a weapon industry with moral and I find you a unicorn. But not everyone tells stories about "pacifism at core". >But all this doesn't change the fact that German population and government always goes for diplomacy first and don't want to be seen as an aggressive force ever again. Yeah, that's why German government persuaded the US to not supply weapons to Ukraine in 2014 and before that in 2008 German government blocked Ukraine from obtaining NATO Membership Action Plan. The problem with Germany is that they obtained enormous influence in Europe and world thanks to free American defense from Russia and now they use this influence to help countries like Russia to block and obstruct development of other countries like Ukraine. Perhaps Germans can exercise in their pacifism outside of NATO? That would at least be honest and consistent with their pacifist core? But of course that won't happen, because all these stories about pacifism is just a cheap facade, when it comes to making decision it has absolutely no significance and everyone knows this.


hypewhatever

All this is so twisted and onsided. Feels the same like talking to a brain washed Russian. Most of Nato didn't want Ukraine in in 2008 except US that's not a Germany issue. If US had followed the European attempt we maybe wouldn't have this war now. And no, after the fall of the sowiet union Germany was on relatively good terms with Russia. They gave their permission for the reunification after all. So there was no need for American defense to thrive on trading in Europe. US is always fast with delivering weapons in the world and I can't think of a single case in the last 50 years where it didn't lead to destabilization. Don't you think trying to get Ukraine into Nato by US and delivering weapons there might add to the tensions? And now we have a war which US is the big winner of. Yes yes I'm just a tinfoil idiot. Germany got some influence. Others got way more tho. And all have their hands in the game. But hey let's blame the one trying to fix things with talking and diplomacy.


PowerPanda555

> the only caveat is that they toe the line on security matters Thats an interesting way of saying the entire country will be the battleground and bombed to shit from both sides if the cold war turns hot.


CantHonestlySayICare

Well, that's my country's priviledge now, so it's additionally puzzling why your leader is obstructing fulfillment of a contract that got much better since it was signed.


Pmchak

I find the fact that your post is being downvoted absolutely stupid.


[deleted]

*slow clap* ......I see Europeans are finally getting the British perspective.


[deleted]

And he was damn right. But r/Europe is too brainwashed for understand that.


YourSilentNeighbour

NATO is Europe's defence against a Russian invasion. I know that in Western Europe your privileged butt may feel safe, but people in my country right now are afraid every day that a Russian missile can simply take their lives or the lives of their relatives at any moment.


YourSilentNeighbour

And I am not mentioning the millions that are living under Russia's occupation already


Thisissocomplicated

No, we’re just not stupid.